Officers Assigned to Protect St. Louis County Executive May Have Abused Regional Background Checks

By Michael Klazema on 2/6/2014

A pair of St. Louis police officers who were charged with protecting Charlie Dooley, the St. Louis County Executive, are being investigated internally after evidence suggested that they were abusing their access to a local background check system. According to Tim Fitch, the county chief, the two officers are the subject of an inquiry that is currently working to determine whether or not the St. Louis background check interface – codenamed REJIS (for Regional Justice Information Services) – was used to conduct unauthorized background checks.

Supposedly, Dooley’s security detail utilized REJIS to run criminal background checks on some of the County Executive’s potential political opponents. Whether or not Dooley was involved in the unauthorized screenings remains to be seen. It is difficult to know at this point if the County Executive urged his protecting officers to dig up dirt on his opponents or if the officers simply acted of their own accord. Dooley did release a statement denying any role in corrupt use of the background check system. He said that he had neither accessed the system himself, nor asked his security officers to do so.

Regardless of the reasoning for the background check abuse, however, Tim Fitch told a local CBS affiliate that any use of the REJIS system not directly related to “criminal justice service” would have to be considered a violation of county rules and would result in disciplinary action. In other words, Dooley’s involvement or lack of involvement with the case won’t change things much for the two accused officers, who may end up facing termination for their uncalled for background investigations.

Fitch first raised suspicion about the two officers last fall, when he found that they had run an unauthorized background check on David Spence, a former candidate in both the 2012 Missouri gubernatorial election and for a spot on the police board that opened up in August of 2013. Dooley nominated Spence personally for the latter position, though Spence ultimately dropped out of the running over disagreements with a piece of legislation that would have required him to submit to a background check. Background screenings are mandatory for all police board nominees and members in Missouri. In a letter to Dooley, Spence said that the background check would create “possible exposure” that he found “unnecessary and unacceptable.”

Dooley’s detractors will likely try to connect him to the unauthorized background checks by citing a motivation to learn precisely what Spence was trying to hide. However, it is also perfectly possible that Dooley’s protecting officers had the same motivations and simply acted alone. Further investigations will seek to shed more light on the matter.

St. Louis’s Regional Justice Information Services are utilized for numerous different applications throughout the state. The database consists of everything from state and federal criminal records to court records. The officers looking into the background of David Spence could have discovered a lot about him from REJIS, including arrest histories, traffic violations, and more.


Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants. 
  • March 01 In an age of "industry disruptors" turning established business models on their heads, companies such as Uber and Lyft rely on a unique workforce of individuals outside the traditional employer-employee context. Uber calls them "partners" while other businesses refer to them as "independent contractors," the official classification these individuals use for tax purposes. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed they had warned a business, Postmates, for misclassifying their staff as independent contractors. In the NLRB's determination, these individuals were employees.
  • February 27 Governor Asa Hutchinson signed House Bill 2216 which amends the employer’s directives regarding a current or prospective employee’s social media account.
  • February 23 A Texas summer camp is in the spotlight after an unflattering investigation from a local news channel. The case has some parents asking what they can do to vet summer camp programs before enrolling their kids.