FAIRFIELD – Jefferson County Sheriff Bart Richmond has been placed on a Brady-Giglio list.
According to public records obtained by The Southeast Iowa Union, Jefferson County Attorney Chauncey Moulding placed Richmond on this list on June 25 following an investigation into an incident, the details of which are not public.
Richmond is the only law enforcement officer in Jefferson County on the Brady-Giglio list, and the official reason for his placement on the list reads: “Lack of Candor, Interference with investigation.”
A Brady-Giglio list is a list of law enforcement officers who the prosecutor, in this case the county attorney, determines to have a history of “incidents of untruthfulness, criminal convictions, candor issues, or some other type of issue which places the officer’s credibility into question.”
One consequence of Richmond being placed on this list is that Moulding will not call Richmond to testify as a witness.
“Very briefly, you are no longer considered a credible law enforcement witness in the courts of Jefferson County, and will not be called as a law enforcement witness in criminal matters charged in this jurisdiction,” Moulding wrote in a letter to Richmond on June 25, 2024, which The Union obtained through a public records request. “As such, as of this date, you should refrain from engaging in actions which would make you a witness to criminal acts taking place in this jurisdiction, particularly, but not limited to interviewing witnesses, issuing citations, swearing criminal complaints, or drafting and executing search warrants. Your engagement in such activities could likely negatively impact the outcomes in court.”
The Union reached out to Richmond for a comment on his inclusion on this list, and he wrote back in an email that he does not comment on ongoing legal matters.
The name “Brady-Giglio list” comes from a pair of U.S. Supreme Court cases, Brady v. Maryland (1963) and United States v. Giglio (1970) which established that a prosecutor’s failure to disclose possible credibility issues among their witnesses violated the Constitution’s due process clause.
In Moulding’s letter to Richmond on June 25, he reviews the events that led him to place Richmond on the Brady-Giglio list.
“I am disappointed that I find myself having to write this letter, however, your actions have given me no choice,” Moulding began his letter to Richmond. “I am required by law and ethically bound to maintain a list of officers in this jurisdiction whose conduct places their credibility at issue. Unfortunately, your actions and inactions of late have generated concerns over your truthfulness, candor, and what appears to be an overt attempt to conceal or withhold legally relevant information from my office, and to instruct your subordinates to do the same.”
Moulding wrote that he scheduled a meeting where Richmond could provide input before Moulding made his decision. The meeting was scheduled for 10 a.m. on June 21. Moulding wrote that Richmond was informed of his right to consult with counsel, and that “attorney Schrock” contacted his office, but was unable to attend the scheduled meeting, unable to attend a proposed alterative date, and unable or unwilling to participate remotely.
Richmond did not appear at the June 21 meeting, and as such, Moulding wrote that he was forced to “make a determination without having the opportunity to receive your input and information.”
Specifically, Moulding wrote that he was placing Richmond on the Brady-Giglio list because:
“You have ignored numerous requests for information about an incident which took place [redacted] involving [redacted].
“You have outright denied a request for policy documentation (which, aside from being the county’s legal counsel and prosecutor entitled to those documents under any number of principles, constitute public documents subject to disclosure upon request to any member of the public) from my paralegal without grounds;
“You instructed subordinates to not cooperate with any investigation by my office.”
Moulding wrote that these facts placed Richmond’s “judgment, credibility, candor and truthfulness in doubt, and I have lost faith that your statements can be relied upon for the truth of their assertions. As such, I am forced to place your name on a Brady-Giglio list maintained by my office.”
Moulding added that he would “welcomely entertain” a request from Richmond to reconsider this decision.
“Frankly, while I am disappointed in your poor exercise of judgment recently, this does not need to be a permanent impairment to you, and I would look forward to hearing any solutions for addressing your issues of candor and truthfulness with my office,” Moulding wrote.
The same day that Moulding wrote to Richmond to inform him of his inclusion on the list, Moulding also notified other law enforcement entities of his decision including the Fairfield Police Leadership Team, Jefferson County Chief Deputy Jerry Marcellus, and representatives of the Iowa State Patrol, Iowa Department of Criminal Investigation, Iowa Attorney General’s Office and U.S. Attorney for the Southern District Rich Westphal.
Moulding told those other law enforcement agencies that his decision to place Richmond on the Brady-Giglio list “in no way impacts the deputies and employees who work in the Sheriff’s office, who comport themselves in keeping with the best traditions of law enforcement and should be considered some of the most professional law enforcement officers in Eastern Iowa.”
Call Andy Hallman at 641-575-0135 or email him at andy.hallman@southeastiowaunion.com
