To fully understand the lengths to which those in the upper echelons of the Jindal administration will go to punish those—especially subordinates—who dare to cross them, you need look no further than the case the Louisiana State Police hierarchy attempted to build against one of its own.
On Feb. 6, 2010, senior trooper Chris Anderson, assisted by 11-year veteran state trooper Jason LaMarca and two other troopers, Patrick Dunn, and Tim Mannino, stopped a flatbed 18-wheeler on I-12 in Tangipahoa Parish being driven by Alejandro Soliz.
LaMarca, with Anderson’s mobile video recorder (MVR) activated and recording every word and move, patted down Soliz. Finding no weapons on the driver, LaMarca then conducted a search of the truck cab and discovered “several kilos of cocaine,” according to court records.
LaMarca pulled his taser from its holster and he and Dunn approached Soliz, ordering him to get down, according to court records and testimony provided by the State Police Commission. After Soliz, who spoke English, refused to comply with several commands of “Get down,” LaMarca attempted unsuccessfully to re-holster his taser as he continued to approach Soliz.
Transferring the taser to his right hand, he cupped his left hand behind Soliz’s head and pulled him to the ground, according to testimony by LaMarca and the other three troopers, testimony supported by the video recording.
No one was injured, no shots were fired, and there were no complaints, then or later, by Soliz of excessive force.
U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon, however, reviewed the video and thought he saw LaMarca strike Soliz in the back of the head “with what appears to be a flashlight or similar item.” Judge Fallon added that the recording showed “three other troopers laughing at this act.”
State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson (aka “Precious”), upon receiving a letter from the judge, immediately ordered an investigation into the incident—as he should have.
But what occurred next went beyond the pale of disciplinary action by Edmonson and his actions have been attributed by those familiar with the case to an act of retaliation for an earlier confrontation between LaMarca and Edmonson’s Chief of Staff, Lt. Col. Charles Dupuy.
Edmonson notified LaMarca on Nov. 18 that he was “suspended for 12 hours without pay and allowances” as a result of his actions. The cause of his suspension was based, Edmonson said, on the following violations of Louisiana State Police Policy and Procedure:
- The use of force policy;
- The use of force reporting policy;
- Conduct unbecoming an officer.
LaMarca, who had a spotless record in his 11 years, promptly filed an appeal with the State Police Commission, primarily to expunge the suspension from his record. The commission heard testimony from all four officers and reviewed the video recording of the arrest and put down of Soliz before issuing its ruling on Aug. 1, 2011.
In its ruling exonerating LaMarca, the commission noted:
- Appellant (LaMarca) had nothing in the hand he used to “put the driver on the ground.” Likewise, we do not perceive appellant’s actions, in doing so, to be the use of excessive force. While the driver had been cooperative until the drugs were found, he became uncooperative thereafter and refused numerous orders to get on the ground.
- While the maneuver used by appellant to take the driver to the ground may not be the one “taught” at the academy, it was effective and did not appear to be the use of “excessive” force.
- We likewise do not perceive the other troopers to be “laughing” at appellant’s action.
- As we do not find that appellant violated the “use of force” policy order, he likewise did not violate the “use of force reporting.”
That normally would have ended the matter. No weapons were used, no one was injured, no one complained of excessive force, and the commission found no violations by LaMarca.
But remember, LaMarca had earlier committed that unpardonable sin of arguing vehemently with Dupuy, Edmonson’s second in command.
And though Dupuy’s name never surfaces in the initial disciplinary action, the commission hearing and its subsequent decision, or court records, Edmonson was dutifully carrying the water for him and he made sure the issue was far from dead as he displayed unprecedented zeal in his attempt to punish LaMarca on behalf of his chief of staff.
Determined to exact revenge for LaMarca’s impudence, Edmonson took the matter up the line to the First Circuit Court of Appeal.
That’s right, he appealed the decision of the state commission charged with the responsibility of promoting effective personnel management practices for the Office of State Police and to protect the fundamental rights of the troopers under Edmonson’s command.
Much like the courtroom experiences of his boss Gov. Bobby Jindal, Edmonson went down in flames. At least the administration is consistent in that respect.
The First Circuit’s ruling of May 2, 2012:
- On review of the video and testimonial evidence concerning the surrounding circumstances at the scene of the rest, we find no error in the commission’s finding that the force and manner used by trooper LaMarca to secure the suspect and “affect the arrest” was not more than was reasonably necessary under the circumstances and hence did not violate procedure.
- On review, we find the verbiage used by the commission in concluding that the force used by LaMarca was not “excessive,” was simply synonymous with the commission’s ultimate finding that there was no violation of the “use of force” procedure order, i.e., that the use of force by trooper LaMarca was reasonably necessary under the circumstances.
- We find the decision of the commission thoroughly and sufficiently reviewed the evidence and testimony produced at the hearing and addressed the procedure order violations lodged against trooper LaMarca in the suspension letter issued by Col. Edmonson.
- After thorough review of the testimonial and video evidence herein…we find the decision of the commission is supported by substantial evidence.
Well, that certainly laid the matter to rest, right?
No, not if you’ve had a confrontation with Dupuy.
Edmonson promptly applied for writs (appealed) to the Louisiana Supreme Court.
And what became of that?
The State Supreme Court simply declined to even consider the matter.
Now it’s over.
Until, that is, it’s determined by Edmonson or Dupuy that LaMarca makes another misstep.
But with the publication of this post and the decisions of the State Police Commission and the First Circuit Court of Appeal now on the record, any similar attempts in the future would come dangerously close to harassment.
Louisiana Voice 
Sounds like the tactics used by the board of dentistry and the Auctioneer board. Edmonson quacks like a typical Louisiana crony.
At this point, I’m not even sure what to say anymore! Obviously, Dental Genie has a great memory entailing the Auctioneer Board. On April 12, 2011, when the LA State Police Terrorism Unit visited my home, http://www.auctioneer-la.org/LSP_report.pdf, I TRULY thought it was limited to LALB harassment and that the Jindal Administration had no involvement.
Now, I’m just not so sure anymore. I asked them if they’d run any kind of reports on me before paying me the “visit,” and Bart Morris responded, “sometimes I find it better to just sit and talk with someone.” I told them that, if they had run reports on me, they’d see I had not even a parking ticket since early 1991 (when I did get a ticket from LSP for speeding), and they did run all sorts of reports of me after the “visit” (see report link).
What I was investigating was rank payroll fraud at the LALB. Having read C. B. Forgotston’s post for today (it’s not yet up on his website, so I’ll supply the link for Act 11 of the LSP Rip Off scandalous play), http://www.lspripoff.com/act11.htm, I’m not so sure Jindal and crew weren’t doing whatever they had to do to keep payroll fraud beneath the surface. Apparently, authority to commit payroll fraud is just a Jindal-given, Edmondson-enforced right in Louisiana government. I think that fact was evidenced by Ms. Edmonds, LALP Executive Director and the target of my investigative efforts bluntly saying at the conclusion of this audio link “welcome to politics.”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EMGAsivVr4&feature=youtu.be.
No wonder the only thing Gov. Jindal’s “special legal assistant,” Jonathan Ringo (now an attorney with Faircloth & crew) would provide as the rationale for terminating my LALB services is, and I quote, “things just aren’t working out.”
As a retired Louisiana State Trooper who got tied up with State Police on several issues and got into their crosshairs, I know first hand how much time, energy, and money they will spend to go after someone. I was involved in several situations because I was “different” and were legally named discrimination and harassment. After going through every procedure outlined by department policy, and going through every channel I was supposed to follow to try to correct, fix, and stop the problem, I had to seek legal help. At that point, we contacted them to try to talk to work it out, to which they replied that they didn’t “talk about things like that.” When my lawyer said that they would leave us no choice but to take them to court, the response was “Do what you have to do.” So we did. And we won. Then they retaliated and really came after me doing things the likes of which had never been done in the history of State Police as far as we knew, even breaking laws to do them. Even their lawyer said it was the stupidest thing he had ever seen. That was under a different administration, but some things don’t change. Unfortunately, power is a dangerous thing for some people. I know some of the people involved and, while I am disappointed, I am not surprised. I am only surprised at the tenacity over something that should not have been a personal issue, and yet it was made very personal. Very, very disappointing, to say the least.
I’ve seen it happen, too, although never experienced it from edmonson I’ve seen a few hitlers and napoleons during my 28 yrs of service and one thing for sure, revenge is a must for them. They don’t rest at night because they are plotting how they will get their revenge on you. So be careful and watch your back, their revenge isn’t always fair and they don’t like to lose.
And just how much did all of this cost the taxpayer in legal fees for these two to bully a subordinate employee who was not only doing his duty but evidently doing it well in an extremely dangerous environment? Part of the problem could be that neither one of these two clowns, Edmonson or Dupuy, have any real police experience and have never affected an arrest in their life much less a dangerous felony arrest. But then again what else should one expect from a Colonel who was chosen by the Louisiana Sheriff’s Assn. based on politics, is unsupervised by the governor and spends more time in a strip club in New Orleans than he does at LSP headquarters. It is most certainly a sad state of affairs.
oh snap…
C. B. Forgotston also just drew attention to an investigative report on Channel 3 in Shreveport entailing Col. Edmondson’s housing perks (along with that of other state officials) which also references the amendment flap. Here’s the link: http://www.ktbs.com/story/26301387/living-on-the-taxpayers-dime-3-investigates-state-official-perks
As a Retired Trooper, we’ve all seen it done. But it is wrong and should never happen. Even though I ended my career in Administration at Headquarters as a “Desk Jockey” (also known as a Pencil Pusher, even though we use computers instead of pencils), earlier I too worked Uniform Patrol. Additionally I worked Criminal Patrols as this Trooper did. It is a high intensity job requiring a clear mind and focus. You purposely are often dealing with the worst parts of our society. It’s bad enough having to always be on guard with everyone you deal with, but it adds a whole new level having to watch your back from those who proclaim to be your leaders. One problem with Colonel Edmonson and Lt. Col. Dupuy is between them, their Patrol experience can be compiled on a 3×5 card. They and those they’ve surrounded themselves with, seek advice from, and promoted to key positions are all the same. They don’t have a clue what it’s like to do that job. That’s why just because you are politically connected it doesn’t mean you have any skills necessary to successfully lead that organization. The Governor makes the appointment. It is his responsibility to first of all pick someone other than a political flunky. It is also his job to properly monitor them. I hear all the Republicans calling out President Obama for being absent from his job. How about Governor Jindal? Where is his oversight and leadership as the State Police has devolved into chaos under Colonel Edmonson, Chief of Staff Dupuy, and their select “Cafeteria Crew?” The tentacles of ineptness, retaliation, and a group devoid of leadership abilities are now so entrenched in this once great Department that the Troopers have to feel like there is no better future in sight. The State Police is on the brink of collapse and the Governor keeps pouring on the gas with increased Retirement Benefits for Edmonson and unconstitutional bills that promise something that more than likely can’t be provided. At what point will the safety of the Troopers be impacted by the actions and attitudes of their “leaders”? Governor Jindal, is that what it will take for you to focus on this evolving and increasing problem? I keep going back to a line from the movie, “Armageddon” where one of the characters asks for a description of how bad it will be where they will arrive for their mission. After hearing the terrifying specifics he says, “Scariest environment imaginable… that’s all you had to say… scariest environment imaginable!” That’s what you have now with State Police. Scariest Environment Imaginable!
You have no idea brother…morale is in the toilet.
I am so glad to see this come out. I have NEVER known of the department’s previously appealing a ruling of the Commission to the courts. Jason LaMarca is a good man/Trooper and probably has made more criminal arrests in ONE week than Edmondson/Dupuy have made in their LIVES. Neither of them are deserving of their positions.
[…] via A word of caution to state troopers: don’t anger the powers that be if you don’t want legal prob…. […]
I can only agree with and ratify the comments of those Troopers in this forum. As a 23 year veteran of LSP, and retired Lieutenant, I have witnessed the “Good Ole Boy” system first-hand. The only negative comment that I have about current Superintendent Edmonson is that he has displayed extreme “cronyism” in surrounding himself with “yes men.” Mike has a good heart, but poor judgment in selecting those he would empower, due to a sense of loyalty and friendship.One glaring example, Charlie Dupuy, is a bully and a coward, who will seek vengeance and retribution on anyone who has challenged him throughout his career. Neither of them has worked a crash, changed a flat, or written a ticket in over 20 years, but they control the complete existence of those who work daily and honorably to serve the public. Neither got a speck of dirt on them during Katrina, Gustav or any other disaster that LSP Troopers served honorably and selflessly through. My prayer is that the next governor will appoint a leader for LSP who puts the sacrifice and service of the fine men and women who put honor and the welfare of others ahead of their own selfish ambitions. “Yes Men” are an easy choice, because they provide a sense of security to the insecure who appoint them. “Leaders” will challenge what is right and just, on behalf of those who carry out the mission.
Amen !!!! Thanks for having the courage to speak out, wish I could…
Keep up the good work!!!! We need people like you to help us get his dirty deeds uncovered.
I was never a trooper. Never got the politics right. But I was in radio back in the late 70’s and early 80’s just prior to becoming a deputy sheriff, (for almost 20 years) and we had to edit and read the news. I used to watch news releases out of B.R. and with particular interest those from LSP. What I found interesting was that a lot of PIO comments came from the current col., then a trooper. Then a sgt. Then a Lt. etc. I watched his rank move up all while doing an almost nothing job. I wondered how that it could seem someone was spending an entire career at HQ, straight out of the academy. Then I met one. Our local troop got a new trooper straight from the academy. He spent MAYBE 6 months on the road and all of a sudden he was their PIO. Then became a sgt. Then he, well, you get the drill.
I never understood why agencies would spend all that money to hire, train and equip troopers/deputies/officers and then let them spend their entire career doing something a civilian could do. Why bother with the badg & the gun & police car? It’s a waste of a true police position. And if you think they occasionally might see something and do something, NO WAY. I spent a drenching hour in a downpour one day at a TC that occurred right next to the local troop waiting for the one beleaguered road dog they had working who had to come from 60 miles away to work the accident. Of all the uniform ‘troopers’ in that building that day you think one of them MIGHT come out and tend to this thing so we could clear the roadway? Stop laughing.
All those shiny state police cars I could see under the back portico driven to work by their respective capt, lt’s and sgts sure looked good under there.
And dry.
I was never a trooper. Never got the politics right. But I was in radio back in the late 70’s and early 80’s just prior to becoming a deputy sheriff, (for almost 20 years) and we had to edit and read the news. I used to watch news releases out of B.R. and with particular interest those from LSP. What I found interesting was that a lot of PIO comments came from the current col., then a trooper. Then a sgt. Then a Lt. etc. I watched his rank move up all while doing an almost nothing job. I wondered how that it could seem someone was spending an entire career at HQ, straight out of the academy. Then I met one. Our local troop got a new trooper straight from the academy. He spent MAYBE 6 months on the road and all of a sudden he was their PIO. Then became a sgt. Then he, well, you get the drill.
I never understood why agencies would spend all that money to hire, train and equip troopers/deputies/officers and then let them spend their entire career doing something a civilian could do. Why bother with the badg & the gun & police car? It’s a waste of a true police position. And if you think they occasionally might see something and do something, NO WAY. I spent a drenching hour in a downpour one day at a TC that occurred right next to the local troop waiting for the one beleaguered road dog they had working who had to come from 60 miles away to work the accident. Of all the uniform ‘troopers’ in that building that day you think one of them MIGHT come out and tend to this thing so we could clear the roadway? Stop laughing.
All those shiny state police cars I could see under the back portico driven to work by their respective capt, lt’s and sgts sure looked good under there.
And dry.
I have witnessed the whole thing. It stinks and its a shame that it got this way. One troop (middle one) had several trooper lying on their daily reports about how many tickets they wrote. They made up numbers and lied on an official report. They got caught red handed. Their punishment should have been harsh to say the least. They got 1 day suspension. That’s not joke. It happened. If they lied on one report what other lies have been written on their reports. ummmm???
[…] to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Such a move by Col. Davis would not be unprecedented as former LSP Col. Mike Edmonson did so (though for inappropriate reasons) because he had a personal vendetta against Trooper Jason […]
[…] vault two years prior to that incident), we stressed the fact that Davis has the liberty to do as former LSP Col. Mike Edmonson did (though Edmonson did so for the wrong reasons) and appeal the LSPC’s decision to the First […]
It is not right that the Commander of the Louisiana State Troopers has been excused. If he will try to do better how about letting citizens go with just a warning? I am sure we citizens will try to do better!