11 Officers Cheat in National City Promotion Test : Police: Applicants for senior posts are caught in scandal, but no disciplinary action is taken.

By H.G. REZA

Aug. 10, 1990 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITER

Eleven National City police officers were caught cheating on a promotion exam, but no disciplinary action was taken against them because they were never instructed not to cheat, a city official said Thursday.

The incident occurred May 16 and 17, when 22 officers who competed for 21 senior police officer posts took an oral exam, said National City Personnel Director Dick Schulman.

All 22 applicants received a passing grade, but a subsequent Police Department investigation revealed that 11 officers either knew the test questions in advance or revealed them to others, Schulman said.

None of the officers was disciplined for cheating, Schulman said. Instead, the offenders were pulled from the “eligible list” for promotion, he added. Those officers who did not cheat were promoted to senior police officer, a rank just below sergeant.

“I think the officers who went before the interview board were not alerted by the board that they should not discuss anything about the interview with other candidates,” Schulman said. “Under the circumstances, I think what was done (lack of disciplinary action) was appropriate. There was not evidence in my judgment to bring disciplinary action against any officers.”

Those officers caught cheating will be eligible to take the promotion exam when it is offered again, he added.

Sources familiar with the incident told The Times that police officials and City Manager Tom McCabe decided to keep details of the cheating scandal from the City Council. McCabe failed to return phone calls Thursday, and a Police Department secretary said Chief Stan Knee and Assistant Chief Wayne Fowler were out of the office and unavailable for comment.

Word of the incident caught City Councilman Fred Pruitt by surprise. Pruitt expressed anger over not having been told of the cheating and vowed to seek an explanation from McCabe at the next City Council meeting.

“In my view, if you cheat on an application for a job anywhere and are caught, there’s no way you’re going to get hired,” Pruitt said. “If you’re caught cheating on a college test, you’ll fail the class. Why can’t this same logic apply to police officers? Why are they exempt from disciplinary action? They have to abide by the law like anybody else.

“If in fact McCabe knew about this, I cannot conceive of a responsible city manager not informing the City Council of this occurrence, especially if it happened three months ago.”

The absence of disciplinary action against the officers also brought protests from defense attorneys.

Attorney Eugene Iredale, who has defended two former National City police officers in criminal cases, said that cheating makes an officer’s credibility suspect.

“Any act of dishonesty on an officer’s part, if sufficiently serious, is relevant on cross-examination to show the person’s character is poor,” Iredale said about cheating police in general. “If a police officer is willing to cheat on a promotion exam, is he not by the same logic willing to shade or color his testimony on an important case if it could enhance his status for promotion?”

“We rely on our officers to give truthful and accurate testimony so justice can be done. An officer who attains a phony rank because of cheating on a test is ultimately as dangerous as a heart surgeon who has cheated on his medical board exams,” Iredale added.

A source familiar with the cheating incident said the National City Police Department’s policy and procedures manual “requires all officers to be truthful at all times.” According to the source, who asked for anonymity, the cheating began when one officer was approached by two other officers who wanted to know the questions asked on the test.

The first officer balked, but relented when the other officers asked him if the “interview board told you not to talk about the test,” the source said. When he answered “no,” the other two officers persuaded him to reveal the test questions. Eventually, eight other officers became involved in the incident.

Other sources, who also requested anonymity, said the cheating created a rift within the department when police administrators initially decided to discipline only a handful of the cheaters.

However, police officials relented and decided against disciplining anybody. One source said that Police Officers Assn. attorney Everett Bobbitt warned police officials of legal action against the department if “discretionary discipline” was meted out.

Bobbitt declined to comment publicly about the role he played in the incident. However, he acknowledged that he “represented a number of people involved.”

“The matter is closed. There was no clear proof of anyone cheating, and there was no discipline against any of the officers,” Bobbitt said.

Spokesmen for two major local police agencies said cheating on a promotion exam usually brings disciplinary in their departments. Chula Vista Police Chief Bill Winters and San Diego Police Cmdr. Larry Gore talked specifically about their departments’ policies, without commenting about the National City incident.

“It’s a given. You should not cheat on exams,” Winters said. “If the facts are there, I would think that our department’s policy mandates some disciplinary action. But you have to know all the facts before you can make that judgment.”

“Cheating is cheating,” Gore said. “If an officer gets a dishonest, unfair advantage on an exam, we would deal with it very severely. . . . We insist on honesty from all of our people. Anything less is dealt with severely.”