If you enforce the law, are you above the law?

What happens when law enforcement officers behave as if they're above the law? At the Iredell County Sheriff's Office, the answer to that question apparently depends on who you are.

Take the employment of Tommy Adams for example.

Redmond violated his own policies when he hired Adams, a private citizen, in the early 2000s. Applicants considered for employment at the sheriff's office, among other requirements, must “be of good moral character” and “have not committed or been convicted of a crime or crimes as specified in 12 NCAC 10B.0204 & .0307 (felony, certain misdemeanors),” according to http://www.co.iredell.nc.us/departments/sheriff/employment.asp.

At the time Redmond hired him, Adams' former employer – a major retail store in Winston Salem – had charged him with felony embezzlement. Adams pleaded the charge down to a misdemeanor, which remained on his record when Redmond hired him to work at the Iredell County Sheriff's Office.

Adams worked as an unsworn employee at the sheriff's office before enrolling in Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) in or around 2004. Iredell County paid Adams' tuition and fees, according to the county's finance department, even while many rookies have paid their own way through BLET, taking classes while working at the sheriff's office at opposite times of the day.

But Adams' luck didn't end there. Redmond violated his hiring policies – again – when he promoted Adams to detective sergeant straight out of basic training.

Detective-applicants at the sheriff's office should have a minimum of “3 to 5 years of experience in law enforcement; or any equivalent combination of training and experience,” states a recent job posting at http://www.co.iredell.nc.us/departments/sheriff/employment.asp. While Adams had worked at the sheriff's office for a while before enrolling in BLET, he had never been a sworn law-enforcement officer.

Such a promotion – fresh out of rookie school with no prior training as a sworn officer – is virtually unheard of in the law-enforcement community, according to several North Carolina police chiefs and one sheriff-hopeful that responded to recent Report questions.

“It is highly unlikely that someone would go straight in to investigations right out of BLET,” said Wilkesboro Police Chief Robert Bowlin. “They may possess the education at that point, however, they would not possess the 'street smarts' knowledge or just basic law enforcement skills to be effective as a criminal investigator.”

The Raleigh Police Department requires an applicant for detective to have four years of law-enforcement experience with two years of continuous experience at the Raleigh PD. Applicants for sergeant must have six years of law-enforcement experience and two years of continuous service at the department.

Beaufort Police Chief Steve Lewis, as many chiefs contacted by the Report, said one exception may exist to the general rule: “Sometimes there are officers that have years of law-enforcement experience, leave the profession for various reasons, and then return having to pass through BLET again.”

However, Lewis said, he “definitely” would not promote “a rookie without any experience.”

Perhaps experience would have kept Adams from making the mistake he made in or around 2005.

Adams, accompanied by then-Det. Sgt. Ron “Duck” Wyatt, arrested a convicted felon who was living in a dwelling with firearms, which is a felony in North Carolina. Adams collected two guns, cases and ammunition from the felon's residence and signed an evidence sheet indicating he had submitted all of it to the sheriff's office evidence room.

Approximately one year later – after the defendant in the case had pleaded guilty to the charges against him – it was discovered that the guns were not in the evidence room, after all.

Upon learning that the guns were missing, or had never been turned in, two of Redmond's top cops, Capt. Jimmy Craven and Capt. Darren Campbell, questioned Adams, who initially denied any knowledge of the handguns' whereabouts. Adams later said that he and Wyatt were planning to keep the firearms, but, responding to questions, Wyatt told Craven and Campbell that besides being there when the guns were seized, he knew nothing about the firearms' whereabouts. With Adams' acknowledgment that he was in possession of one firearm, Campbell escorted Adams to his residence, where Adams retrieved the gun and turned it over to Campbell.

Adams was told that Wyatt's house had been searched for the second firearm and that Wyatt did not have the gun. Only after that did Adams retrieve the second firearm from his personal vehicle. He turned it over to Campbell.

In an August 2008 Statesville Record & Landmark article about the strength and security of Iredell County's police evidence rooms, Redmond referenced the years-old incident. Though he never mentioned Adams' name, the newspaper quoted Redmond as saying that “a deputy … didn't follow the right procedures in submitting those weapons to the evidence room.”

In a clear attempt to make light of the situation, Redmond said in the article that “the weapons were not evidence in any case.”

That's simply not true. The guns were, in fact, evidence in a criminal case. While the defendant had already pleaded guilty in the case, his firearms should have been handled in accordance with a Superior Court judge's ruling; in this particular case, a judge had ordered the guns destroyed. Adams and/or the sheriff's office could have submitted a request through the district attorney for the guns to be turned over to the sheriff's office for use or training purposes. But they didn't. The guns, therefore, were to remain as evidence until destroyed or a Superior Court judge changed his or her disposition to allow for other actions to be taken.

Redmond said the deputy “got in trouble” for his actions. Sheriff's office personnel dispute that. They say Adams wasn't punished at all for converting evidence to personal use.

Regardless of whether or not he was punished, the fact that the sheriff's office employs him to this very day indicates that he did not receive the punishment that he apparently would have at many other law-enforcement agencies in North Carolina.

“I would fire that officer fast, quick and in a hurry,” said Monroe Police Chief Debra Duncan, responding to Report questions asking how chiefs and sheriffs would respond if an officer, with no extenuating circumstances and no permission from a supervisor, converted evidence – guns, drugs or money – to personal use.

Said Statesville Police Chief Tom Anderson: “I would hope this would not happen at any agency, but I assure you that if this were to happen at my agency, swift and proper action would follow.”

“This is public trust 101,” Anderson said. “I would initiate an internal investigation immediately. I would review the general information with the District Attorney and initiate a separate investigation due to what would look to be a felony larceny and possible obstruction of justice."

Apparently following a tip, the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) became involved quite some time after the incident occurred. At some point during its "investigation," Adams' criminal record was expunged, permanently removing the misdemeanor charge that had been on it.

Steve Wilson was the SBI agent in charge of the case. His investigation included interviews with several people, at least one of whom has said that the intent of the investigation was to clear Adams and the sheriff's office by finding no criminal misconduct in the handling of the evidence.

Wyatt, who has since retired from the sheriff's office, initially declined to comment on the matter. But when asked if he retired because of the Adams incident and the resulting SBI investigation, Wyatt laughed and said no.

He confirmed speaking to Wilson on several occasions as part of the investigation, and “I asked if I was being interviewed as a suspect or a witness," Wyatt said. At that time, Wilson said he was not sure if there was a criminal investigation and he simply needed clarification on a few matters, Wyatt added.

Wyatt was asked if he outranked, supervised, trained and/or assigned cases to Adams or if he signed off on Adams' work. Wyatt said he did not.

Wilson took notes during the interview and told Wyatt that he would prepare a written statement from the notes for Wyatt to sign, but Wyatt said he never received that statement from Wilson.

Wyatt said he did, however, meet with Wilson and another agent in the summer of 2009. At that time, they again discussed the Adams case but also Wyatt's participation in golf tournaments to raise money for the re-election bid of Redmond for Sheriff. When asked if that investigation was linked to former sheriff candidate Mark Nicholson's recent reference to an SBI investigation of Redmond and his top cops for using county equipment on county time to campaign for Redmond in 2006, Wyatt declined to comment, citing his need to speak with his attorney before responding to additional questions.

"I'm concerned about my family's welfare," he said, referring further Report questions to the SBI. "If the SBI was doing an investigation they should be able to answer your questions."

An e-mail to Attorney General Roy Cooper went unanswered.

Both Redmond and Campbell also declined to answer Report questions. The sheriff responded through Campbell, citing personnel and saying: “Our attempt to craft an answer to each question presents practical and legal difficulties for us.”

However, they issued this statement: “The Iredell County Sheriff's Office and SBI conducted a proper and thorough review of this matter. Sheriff Redmond is satisfied that North Carolina law has been followed in all respects, and professional law enforcement standards and practices continue to be applied and enforced for the benefit of Iredell County citizens.”

When asked if the “proper and thorough review” had been completed, and if the state had cleared Adams of any wrongdoing, Campbell did not respond. He also didn't respond when asked why the sheriff wouldn't answer the questions if he was “satisfied” with the results of the “proper and thorough review.”