ite of Utah
YR HERBERT
INCLRJ.COX
July 16, 2015
Brad Horne
5681 South 320 West
Murray, Utah 84107
RE: Intent (o Discipline - Demotion
Dear Lt. Home
Having reviewed the information submitted to me by agency management, and having
considered the discretionary factors in Department of Human Resource Management (DHRM)
Rule 477-11, it is my imtent to recommend to Commissioner Squires that you be demoted from
your position as a Lieutenant with the Utah Department of Public Safety. The intended demotion
will consist of a reduction in pay to $32.52 per hour and a change in position and rank to
Trooper.
My recommendation is based on the following information:
During your time with the DUI squad, you have conducted multiple traffic stops
which appear to lack probable cause, destroyed contraband or evidence, instructed
subordinates to conduct inappropriate law enforcement activities, instructed
subordinates to stop audio recordings of your conversations with them on the
scene of a traffic stop and used your position in the patrol to secure personal
loans. Each of these offenses is in violation of policy and undermines the mission
of the patrol to provide professional police and traffic services and to protect the
constitutional rights of all people in Utah
On November |, 2013, you stopped a vehicle on suspicion of DUI. You asked a
trooper to take over the investigation and told the trooper you had stopped the
vehicle because of an inoperable license plate light. You Jater told the trooper not
to worry about the light and cite the driver for failure to signal and lane travel
violations. Your changing story and the trooper’s observation that the light was in
working order concerned him enough to seek advice from another supervisor.Intent to Discipline — Demotion
July 16, 2015
Page 2 of 4
fearing the stop was improper. Taken in concert, they undermine your credibility
asa leader and the trust of your peers and commanders.
On July 19, 2014, you stopped a vehicle after it passed by you and other officers
working a traffic stop while one or more of its occupants yelled obscenities in the
direction of the traffic stop. ‘The other troopers present report that they observed
no traffic or criminal violations to justify stopping that vehicle and believe that
you only stopped the vehicle because of the yelling you heard.
On August 16, 2014, you stopped one of a group of three motorcycles on
suspicion of DUI. During your investigation, you noticed a person you believed
to have been driving one of the other motoreycles among the on-lookers of your
initial stop. You directed a subordinate trooper to arrest the man on suspicion of
DUI and administer field sobriety tests. When the man would not cooperate, a
warrant was sought and denied by a judge. Even so, you persisted and ordered
the trooper to book the man into jail and issue @ DUI citation. The trooper refused
to do so because he believed there was no probable cause for the action. I believe
you were fully aware that your order was improper as you never discussed
charging the trooper with insubordination with any superior or HR.
These are just three examples of traffic stops you conducted where the probable
cause for the stop is weak at best. Multiple troopers report that it was common
for you to stop vehicles and then turn them over to other troopers for investigation
with weak probable cause and no video evidence fo back your statements. Others
reported that you instructed them to stop audio recordings during traffic stops.
Still other times after questionable stops, you submitted reports so late that no
action could be taken, effectively burying the matter. This conduct shows a
pattern of cavalier and undocumented law enforcement that is in violation of
policy and opens the Department to a great deal of liability
On at least two occasions (November 14, 2013 and October 24, 2014) you failed
to handle evidence properly and cither destroyed or ordered citizens to destroy
drugs and drug paraphernalia. The latter oceasion was the same time you directed
the trooper to stop his audio recording as referenced above. You then proceeded
to instruct the trooper not to say anything about what happened with the drugs.
Destruction of evidence is not allowed by policy. It is clear that you knew this
because you ordered a Letter of Counsel to be issued to a subordinate trooper for
destroying evidence in February 2014 and because you directed the trooper not to
tell anyone what he saw you do,Intent to Discipline ~ Demotion
July 16, 2015
Page 3 of 4
In December 2013, you asked the owner of a tow company for a loan to pay off.
credit card debt so that the card could be used to reserve hotel rooms for a DUI
squad enforcement activity. You later borrowed additional money from the man
totaling several thousands of dollars. Although you deny using your position in
the UHP to obtain the loan, it was not possible for you to avoid doing so. You
knew the man because his tow company is on contract with the state and UHP.
le position when you asked for a loan because he
You put him in an impos:
knew that you were the commander of the DUI squad and that refusing to loan
you money could result in Jess business for his company as you could have
influenced the rotation of companies used for tow services. Thus, whether you
explicitly named UHP as you procured the loan, approaching this person for a
Joan cast the UHP in a poor light—especially where you acknowledge you have
made no payment on the loans. This is in violation of the Law Enforcement Code
thies wherein you agreed to “keep [your] private life unsullied as an example
to all.”
of,
During your more than 27 years as a law enforcement officer, you have accomplished a
reat deal of good. However, that same experience makes it difficult for me to believe that
vehicle stops with questionable probable cause, destroying evidence or ordering subordinates to
make improper arrests were due to any misunderstanding of policy and procedure by you. A
leader in the Highway Patrol must lead by example in policy compliance and inspire confidence
in subordinate officers that you can help guide them to accomplish their goals properly, Your
misconduct has actually created the opposite—an environment where policy violations are
commonplace and mistrust and apprehension are prevalent. All of this clearly demonstrates that
you should not be in a leadership role in the Utah Highway Patrol.
Your conduct is in violation of Department of Human Resource Management (DHRM)
Rule 477-9-1, governing standards of conduct, DHRM Rule 477-9-1, governing standards of
conduct, Department of Public Safety (DPS) Policy 300.3, governing constitutional
requirements, DPS Policy 303.1.2(c). governing general expectations of officers, DPS Policy
304,2(ad), governing gifts and gratuities, DPS Policy 516.3.1(b), governing disposition of drugs
and drug paraphernalia, DPS Policy 609.2.1(a), governing discretion to arrest, DPS Policy
619.2(b)2, governing recording of police activities and the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. It
is, therefore, my recommendation to Commissioner Squires that you be demoted from your
current rank and pay as outlined above
If you wish to be heard on this matter. you have five (5) working days from your receipt
of this letier to submit a written response and request a meeting with the Commissioner of the
Department of Public Safety or his designee, and to have that response considered by him or his
designee. Your request and written response should be sent to:Intent to Discipline - Demotion
July 16, 2015
Page 4 of 4
DPS/Human Resources
Attn: Bryan Embley
PO Box 141775
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-1775
Email: bkembley@utah.gov
Should you choose not to respond, or if your response is not received within five (5)
‘working days from your receipt of this letter. you will be deemed to have waived your right to be
heard, and the Commissioner will make a final agency decision based on the information
provided to him by agency management.
Please direct any questions you may have regarding this process to the Human Resource
Office for the Department of Public Safety at (801) 965-4744
Daniel Fuhr
Superintendent, UP
| acknowledge repefpyof this Jetterangicfderstand my right to respond as instructed above
vnithin five woykKingdays fig the re€eipt of this letter.
/
ore
nw
fae
oo —-/ Ss
Employee Signature
[30% Iho co
Gl. Pole
Make Korhn
woke RyprolrUtah Department of Public Safety
Case #: 1514 0035
Executive Summary
On August 16, 2014, Lt. Brad Home conducted a traffic stop on a group of three motorcyclists near 4500
South State St, Murray Utah. The probable cause for the traffic stop is questionable and there is no video
evidence ofthe stop. Only one motorcyclist was stopped and detained; that driver was eventually arrested for
DUL A pedestrian who walked to the area ofthe traffic stop, which Home believed was in the group of
motorcycles, was also arrested. That pedestrian’s name a,
That incident, as well as a numberof other concems with Home and his conduct was brought to the attention
of UHP administration, and an LA investigation was ordered. The IA investigation uncovered several other
incidents of questionable conduct by Hor
Additionally, discovered during the investigation, was an incident where Home is alleged t0 have used the
reputation of the Utah Highway Patrol to secure a loan from a private citizen who is a State of Utah contractorUtah Department of Public Safety
Case #: 151A 0035
Disposition & Findings
Terms of Findings:
Unfounded: The complaint as alleged did not actually happen
Exonerated: The allegations contained in the complaint were found to be true; however, the employee's actions
were lawful and reasonable under the circumstance.
Not Sustained: There is not sufficient evidence t0 prove or disprove allegations; therefor, itis resolved in favor of
the employee.
Sustained: The allegations were found to be true.
Alleged Violation of DPS Policy and Procedure
Law Enforcement Code of Ethics:
Asa Law Enforcement Officer, my fundamental duty isto serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property;
to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful
against violence or disorder; and to respect the Constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and
Justice.
1 will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all; maintain courageous calm in the face of
danger, scom, or ridicule; develop self-restraint, and be constantly mindful of the welfare of others
Honest in thought and deed in both my personal and official lif, I wll be exemplary in obeying the
Jaws ofthe land and the regulations of my department. Whatever I see or hear of a confidential nature or
that is confided to me in my official capacity will be kept ever secret unless revelation is necessary in the
performance of my duty
1 will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices, animosities, or friendships to influence
my decisions, With no compromise for crime and with relentless prosecution of criminals, I will enforce
the law courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or violence and never accepting
gratuities.
I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of public faith, and I accept it as « public trust to be
held so long as I am true to the ethics of the police service. I will constantly strive to achieve these
objectives and ideals, dedicating myself before God to my chosen profession. ..Jaw enforcement.
rest
arrest
SERED vehicle inventory
‘Traffic stop dated July 19, 2014 (Trooper Hurd)