Terminated Allegedly White Nationalist Cop Sues Department

[Belsnickel]

Quote:RICHMOND, Va. -- Two Virginia police officers were fired after allegations of involvement with white supremacist groups surfaced.

Virginia Division of Capitol Police announced on Wednesday that officer Robert Stamm was fired after a review of possible violations of state and division policies. Stamm had been on administrative leave since February 6.

Capitol Police spokesperson Joe Macenka told CNN the investigation that ultimately led to Stamm's termination started after activist group Antifa Seven Hills shared screenshots of Stamm's social media posts to Twitter, tagging the Capitol Police's account.

On February 5, Antifa Seven Hills wrote a blog post with pictures of Stamm showing tattoos and flags with symbols the activist group says are commonly associated with white supremacy.

On his Facebook profile photo, Stamm has a stamp of the Asatru Folk Assembly, an organization the Southern Poverty Law Center classifies as "perhaps this country's largest neo-Völkisch hate group." The SPLC says neo-Völkisc "adherents base their spirituality on the survival of those descended from white Europeans. ..."

The Anti-Defamation League describes the group in similar terms, calling the Asatru Folk Assembly an "extremist group" and said the officer's "ties to white supremacy are deeply troubling and raise serious concerns."

When asked whether his group was a white nationalist group, Stamm told CNN, "I was discriminated against for my religion. My religion is not politics, it is faith. My constitutional rights were violated. Period."

The Asatru Folk Assembly's website says "Asatru is an expression of the native, pre-Christian spirituality of Europe. More specifically, it is the religion by which the Ethnic European Folk have traditionally related to the Divine and to the world around them."

The Virginia Division of Capitol Police handles law enforcement on the capitol grounds and provides protection to state officials.

The second officer, Daniel Morley, worked for the Chesterfield County Police and was fired on Thursday, Police Chief Jeffrey Katz wrote on a Facebook post.

Katz said Morley was investigated because he "may have an affiliation with Identify Evropa -- an organization widely known for promoting white nationalism."

CNN's attempts to reach Morley for comment were unsuccessful.

Antifa of the Seven Hills also wrote a blog post about Morley, alleging he plays an active role in the Identity Evropa discussion groups as a pledge coordinator.

Chief Katz said in the Facebook post that "Our community deserves to know the men and women of their police department respect and revere them -- whoever they may be."

Katz did not answer whether the Antifa blog post sparked the investigation into Morley, but wrote that "online postings and activities attributed to this officer were reviewed, and once authenticated," Morley was put on leave and eventually terminated.

A federal lawsuit filed in 2017 alleges that Richard Spencer, a white nationalist leader, said one of Identity Evropa's founders, Nathan Damigo, "took the lead in organizing white supremacist participation among people from outside Charlottesville" for the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville.

The organization was then rebranded as American Identity Movement in early March - and photos on the Antifa blog post show Morley waving an American flag behind the organization's banner. The SPLC calls the newly-coined movement a "derivative" of Identity Evropa.

https://wtvr.com/2019/04/20/fired-capitol-police-officer-robert-stamm-says-constitutional-rights-were-violated/

This is going to kick off an interesting legal battle. I have seen a lot of discussions elsewhere about the prevalence of white nationalism among the nation's police ranks. I think like many things, that the estimate of the prevalence is overblown. But it is clear that it does exist. The question is how to handle it. My guess is that the justification will be about how they presented themselves on social media, which I know a lot of departments have strict guidelines about. But what about those that don't do that sort of stupid thing? How many are there? Should it matter unless/until they act on this ideology?

[GMDino]

(04-22-2019, 11:12 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: https://wtvr.com/2019/04/20/fired-capitol-police-officer-robert-stamm-says-constitutional-rights-were-violated/

This is going to kick off an interesting legal battle. I have seen a lot of discussions elsewhere about the prevalence of white nationalism among the nation's police ranks. I think like many things, that the estimate of the prevalence is overblown. But it is clear that it does exist. The question is how to handle it. My guess is that the justification will be about how they presented themselves on social media, which I know a lot of departments have strict guidelines about. But what about those that don't do that sort of stupid thing? How many are there? Should it matter unless/until they act on this ideology?

[fredtoast]

This is a grey area as big as an ocean.

A black person will complain about a white nationalist office.

A Muslim will complain about a Jewish officer.

A Jew will complain bout a Muslim officer.

An atheist will complain about a Christian officer.

Pretty much every religion has an element of "superiority". They all think their beliefs are the correct ones and the others are wrong.

[*bfine32*]

I have 0 issue as long as they do not portray themselves as LEOs on the social media pages.

Of course any signs on on-job bias is grounds for dismissal, but not a simple belief.

[GMDino]

Joke out of the way:  I'm assuming you are correct in how their firing will be argued.  It would be interesting to see if there *IS* anything in their past actions/behavior while on the job that can be used against them.

I can't imagine a white nationalist treated everyone equally no matter their race, but maybe they DID for the sake of their job while going home and posting online about "them" and how bad "they" are.

[Benton]

(04-22-2019, 11:31 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I have 0 issue as long as they do not portray themselves as LEOs on the social media pages.

Of course any signs on on-job bias is grounds for dismissal, but not a simple belief.

Legally, I don't know how things will shake out. Personally, this are pretty much my thoughts, along with I don't have a problem with a department dismissing an employee over it. If the department thinks off time activities create potential conflict or the appearance of potential conflict, they should be able to think about the safety/ability to do the job for other officers. 

[fredtoast]

(04-22-2019, 11:31 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course any signs on on-job bias is grounds for dismissal, but not a simple belief.

It is not that simple.  Openly stating a bias can cause a lot of problems when it come time for a judgement call.

Think about a judge who was an open member of the KKK.  What happens when he rules against a black guy in court but insists it was not just because blacks are inferior to white people.

Eventually there is going to be a problem with a white supremacist acting as a police officer.  If he ever makes a judgement call against a black person that turns out to be wrong the police force is going to be in trouble for having him around.

[*bfine32*]

(04-22-2019, 02:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is not that simple.  Openly stating a bias can cause a lot of problems when it come time for a judgement call.

Think about a judge who was an open member of the KKK.  What happens when he rules against a black guy in court but insists it was not just because blacks are inferior to white people.

Eventually there is going to be a problem with a white supremacist acting as a police officer.  If he ever makes a judgement call against a black person that turns out to be wrong the police force is going to be in trouble for having him around.

Of course it's not that simple; that's why I said any self-association with him as a LEO in the social media should not be allowed.

FWIW, in a twisted way I may have more respect for the LEO that publicly admits his bias. 

[Belsnickel]

(04-22-2019, 03:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course it's not that simple; that's why I said any self-association with him as a LEO in the social media should not be allowed.

FWIW, in a twisted way I may have more respect for the LEO that publicly admits his bias. 

I think the big problem there is that say you have this person taking part in a police involved shooting with a person of color. They may not have identified themselves as an officer, may not have put their workplace on their account, all that. But now there will be people doing an internet search on the name. People will find it and connect the dots which will then put the police department in a tough spot because here is this expressed ideology which changes the perception of the incident.

Right or wrong, whether or not they identify themselves as police on their social media presence really only changes the timing. If they reveal it, then you know up front. If they don't, then there is a potential bigger issue if an incident occurs involving the officer that could result in a larger backlash.

Definitely an interesting thing to think about.

[GMDino]

(04-22-2019, 02:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is not that simple.  Openly stating a bias can cause a lot of problems when it come time for a judgement call.

Think about a judge who was an open member of the KKK.  What happens when he rules against a black guy in court but insists it was not just because blacks are inferior to white people.

Eventually there is going to be a problem with a white supremacist acting as a police officer.  If he ever makes a judgement call against a black person that turns out to be wrong the police force is going to be in trouble for having him around.

Another point that I got reading this is let's say one of these officers covers a black neighborhood.  They all like him, he seems to treat them fairly.  (For the sake of this argument we're pretending that officers can still get to know the areas they cover more deeply than driving around because they are understaffed.)

What happens to that trust that has been built when the people there find out he is a member of a group that hates minorities?  Even if he acts the same, law abiding way, and treats them the same they now have a (reasonable) suspicion of him and he may not get the same respect he got there before...which may affect the way he interacts with them too.

[Dill]

(04-22-2019, 11:29 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a grey area as big as an ocean.

A black person will complain about a white nationalist office.

A Muslim will complain about a Jewish officer.

A Jew will complain bout a Muslim officer.

An atheist will complain about a Christian officer.

Pretty much every religion has an element of "superiority".  They all think their beliefs are the correct ones and the others are wrong.

Fred, these analogies are a bit too loose to be effective.

A White supremacist wants Jews and blacks and Muslims out of the country. He thinks they are "mud people" without souls. They should not have rights.

Atheists, living in Christian American, won't waste time complaining about Christians doing their job. And they don't think Christians should not have rights and be cleared from the country.

American Jews don't think Muslims don't have rights and American Muslims don't think Jews don't have rights.

A small portion of whites are white nationalists. Most black people know this.

Same for Jews and Muslims.  Only a small portion identified with specific ideologies want to get rid of the other side.

So white nationalists, as a specific group defined by willful embrace of a specific ideology, are not comparable to huge, general demographic groupings like White, Jew, Muslim, and Black, which are not tied to any specific ideology.

Complaining that members of a hate group are police officers is not the same as complaining because officers are white or black or Jewish or Muslim.