State Supreme Court overturns lower court’s ruling of firing of Abbeville police officer

The Supreme Court of Louisiana has ruled in favor of Abbeville involving a case that dates back more than three years.
The state’s top court ruled last Friday to uphold the Abbeville City Council’s termination of Julie Gaspard from the Abbeville Police Department (APD). The council made the initial vote to terminate Gaspard in November 2010, after she struck a student by mishandling her Taser during a classroom demonstration.
The Abbeville Fire and Police Civil Service Board and the 15th Judicial District each affirmed the Council’s decision. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals did reverse the lower court’s ruling, but Supreme Court’s decision effectively ends the case.
“We always felt like the council took appropriate action in the termination of Officer Gaspard,” Abbeville Mayor Mark Piazza said Wednesday morning. “We were always confident that the court would uphold that decision, because it was upheld in the district court. Even with the Third Circuit’s ruling, we were confident the Supreme Court would rule in our favor.
“Through the guidance of our City Attorney (Ike Funderburk), we believed our decision would be upheld at the Supreme Court.”
Gaspard was employed as a resource office with the APD and assigned to J.H. Williams Middle
School. Gaspard struck a student when she mishandled her Taser in a classroom at the school. Following the incident, the APD instituted an internal affairs investigation which concluded that Gaspard violated departmental policy by demonstrating her Taser at the school. Ultimately, the City Council conducted a due process hearing which was followed by a unanimous vote by the council to terminate Gaspard.
Gaspard sought to have the Council’s decision reversed by the Fire and Police Civil Service Board. During the course of her appeal, Gaspard requested a copy of the testimony given by a fellow officer during the internal affairs investigation, claiming she had a right to his statement under the Police Officer’s Bill of Rights. The city denied her request on the grounds that the Bill of Rights only entitled her to a copy of her own statement and not that of any other officer. The City further disclosed that the APD could not locate a copy of the other officer’s recorded statement. The Civil Service Board affirmed the City’s termination of Gaspard.
Gaspard then appealed to the 15th Judicial Court, where Judge Patrick Michot affirmed her termination. The court reasoned that the failure to produce a statement did not prove that the officer’s testimony was not recorded, and furthermore, Gaspard was not entitled to a copy of his statement under the Police Officer’s Bill of Rights.
Once again, Gaspard appealed her termination. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with the trial court by holding that there was no proof the officer’s statement was recorded, and that under the Police Officer’s Bill of Rights, Gaspard was entitled to a copy of his statement. The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court and ordered the reinstatement of Gaspard with back pay and benefits from the date of her termination in November, 2010.
The City, facing the possibility of having to pay Gaspard more than three years of salary and benefits, applied to the Louisiana Supreme Court for the issuance of a writ of review of the Court of Appeal’s decision.
In a per curium decision issued on March 14, 2014, the Supreme Court found that the clear language of the Police Officer’s Bill of Rights, provides that an officer is entitled only to a copy of his or her own statement given during an internal affairs investigation. The officer is not entitled to the statement given by any other officer.
The Supreme Court also held that the testimony of the other officers conducting the internal affairs proved that is was the policy and practice of the APD to record the testimony of every person who testified during the internal affairs investigation. This testimony was sufficient to prove that the interview was recorded. The failure of the APD to produce the recording was not proof of its failure to record.
The Supreme Court ultimately concluded that production of the recording was not even an issue because Gaspard was not entitled to received the recording. The Supreme Court overturned Court of Appeal’s decision, reinstated the court’s decision and confirmed Gaspard’s termination.
“I am very pleased that the decision came out the way it did,” Funderburk told the Council Tuesday during a regular meeting.
Members of the Council thanked Funderburk for his efforts.
“Thank you for your persistence on this,” Councilman-at-Large Francis Plaisance told Funderburk. “It is all to the benefit of the City of Abbeville.”
Councilman Wayne Landry, District D, agreed.
“This is something we have been on edge throughout the whole process,” Landry said. “We knew we were right (in our decision) and the Supreme Court proved that we were right.”
Councilman Francis Touchet Jr. pointed out that Abbeville will now be a reference point for the courts in the future in regard to similar cases.
“I think this proves that when you go through the process,” Touchet said, “things do come out the way they should. It is the persistence of our legal counsel that got us to this point. We did not give up and, when we went all the way to the Supreme Court, we actually made some law.”
Funderburk said that is indeed the case.
“Yes, we made some law,” Funderburk told the council. “Other communities will not have to face this issue.”

A press release contributed to this story.