Logosm.gif (1927 bytes)
navlinks.gif (4688 bytes)
Hruler04.gif (5511 bytes)

Back to Metropolitan Police Department main page

Boraks & Jamnback, letters to Interim Chief Sonya T. Proctor
March 4, 1998, and March 18, 1998




Dorothy Brizill
Bonnie Cain
Jim Dougherty
Gary Imhoff
Phil Mendelson
Mark David Richards
Sandra Seegars


DCWatch Archives
Council Period 12
Council Period 13
Council Period 14

Election 1998
Election 2000
Election 2002

Election 2004
Election 2006

Government and People
Anacostia Waterfront Corporation
Boards and Com
Campaign Finance
Chief Financial Officer
Chief Management Officer
City Council
Control Board
Corporation Counsel
DC Agenda
Elections and Ethics
Fire Department
FOI Officers
Inspector General
Housing and Community Dev.
Human Services
Mayor's Office
Mental Health
Motor Vehicles
Neighborhood Action
National Capital Revitalization Corp.
Planning and Econ. Dev.
Planning, Office of
Police Department
Property Management
Public Advocate
Public Libraries
Public Schools
Public Service Commission
Public Works
Regional Mobility Panel
Sports and Entertainment Com.
Taxi Commission
Telephone Directory
University of DC
Water and Sewer Administration
Youth Rehabilitation Services
Zoning Commission

Issues in DC Politics

Budget issues
DC Flag
DC General, PBC
Gun issues
Health issues
Housing initiatives
Mayor’s mansion
Public Benefit Corporation
Regional Mobility
Reservation 13
Tax Rev Comm
Term limits repeal
Voting rights, statehood
Williams’s Fundraising Scandals


Appleseed Center
Cardozo Shaw Neigh.Assoc.
Committee of 100
Fed of Citizens Assocs
League of Women Voters
Parents United
Shaw Coalition



What Is DCWatch?

themail archives

Law Offices
Boraks & Jamnback

1920 L Street, N.W.
Fourth Floor
Washington, D.C. 20036
TEL: (202) 783-7755
FAX: (202) 783-5061

March 18, 1998


Sonya T. Proctor
Interim Chief
D.C. Metropolitan Police Department:
300 Indiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.

Re: Winfred Stanley, Reginald Smith and John Daniels

Dear Interim Chief Proctor:

As indicated in my previous letter to you dated March 4 , 1998 (copy enclosed), my firm, along with Steve Leckar, Esquire, of Butera & Andrews, represents Winfred Stanley and Reginald Smith with respect to the improper termination of their employment with MPD. Since the date of that letter, we have also been retained by John Daniels regarding his similar claim.

My letter of March 4, 1998 requested a response from you or your attorney by March 11, 1998. Although you have not provided me with a response, or even the courtesy of an acknowledgment of my correspondence, I will advise you of our current position in what amounts to a final effort to commence a dialogue prior to litigation.

As you may know, Stanley, Smith and Daniels have all filed pro se OEA appeals of their discharges in order to avoid waiving any of their tights due to untimeliness. We now intend to enter our appearances as their counsel in these cases, and will make all efforts to obtain prompt hearing dates. If we do not obtain the relief sought before OEA, we will then file suit in federal court .

As indicated in my March 4, 1998 letter, we believe your actions in constructively discharging our clients exceeded the lawful powers of your position. We have reviewed your letter of February 20, 1998, which purports to respond to Councilmember Evans letter of February 17, 1998. Although you do not respond to Councilmember Evans ' request that you provide the reasons for our clients' dismissals, you do list the authorities that you relied upon to take these actions.

We have researched the provisions that you cite, including the legislative histories, and determined that your actions in terminating our clients were clearly beyond the scope of the authority granted to your position. Your analysis of Section 5204(a) of Public Law 104-208 is flawed, and accordingly, your constructive termination of our clients pursuant to its authority was illegal.

It is of great concern to our clients, and to us as attorneys, that you have set the precedent of interpreting the authority given to your office by the Control Board as a license to completely disregard the procedural protections and guarantees afforded to all career status D.C. government employees. Our review of the law, the applicable regulations, and Control Board directives does not lead us to believe that the Control Board intended to give you the power to fire career status officers at your complete discretion as you claim. Your letter of February 20, 1998, to Councilmember Evans refers to "regulations" that you developed "with the approval of the Authority," to implement "the Order" that you claim provides you with discretionary power to terminate career service employees . We are aware of no such "regulations" that you, or the MPD, or the Control Board have "developed" to address this situation, or govern your discretion. If such regulations exist, we ask that you provide them to us immediately .

Our review of the legislation passed by Congress indicates that the Control Board itself does not have the authority to direct the termination of career status employees of the MPD without good cause or due process. If the Control Board chooses to ratify your unlawful actions, and assert that it has a grant of authority from Congress that allows it to terminate career service MPD officers without due process, we will challenge that authority in court .

In addition to your illegal actions outlined above, you have also failed to retract the defamatory statements concerning our clients ' performance that you were reported to have made to the press and Councilmember Evans, we intend to explore this matter fully, and will seek Damages against you individually if we determine that these are actionable claims.

In sum, your decision to abruptly terminate these man, each of whom has given Over 21 years of exemplary service to the MPD, with no legitimate care* and without: due process, is disgraceful. bike them, you have been a District Commander in the MPD and should be more considerate of our client' s situation. You are not an outsider who cannot be expected to relate to the pain you have caused to these honorable public servants.

We have attempted to contact you privately to discuss these cases, and you have decided to ignore our request. Therefore, as indicated, we are sending copies of this letter to the Control Board, the Mayor's Office, Ms. Norton's office, Corporation Counsel, and the City Council in order to effectuate accountability on your part.

We would like to hear from you or your attorney by no later than 5:00 P.M. on March 23, 1998, if you have any interest in discussing a resolution of these matters short of litigation.


John H. Jamnback, Esquire



cc: Steve Leckar, Esquire
Winfred Stanley
Reginald Smith
John Daniels

Members Of the City Council
Mayor Marion Barry
Andrew Brimmer
Members of the Control Board
Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton
John Ferren, Esquire

Back to top of page

Law Offices
Boraks & Jamnback

1920 L Street, N.W.
Fourth Floor
Washington, D.C. 20036
TEL: (202) 783-7755
FAX: (202) 783-5061

March 4, 1998

Via Hand Delivery

Sonya T. Proctor
Interim Chief
D.C. Metropolitan Police Department
300 Indiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001

Re: Winfred Stanley and Reginald Smith

Dear Chief Proctor:

My firm has been retained, along with Steve Leckar, Esg., of Butera & Andrews, to represent Winfred Stanley and Reginald Smith with respect to the improper termination of their employment as District Commanders with the Metropolitan Police Department.

Your decision to force Stanley and Smith to either resign on two hours notice or face immediate termination from their employment constitutes constructive discharge under the law of this jurisdiction. Moreover, your actions exceeded the lawful powers of your position, and violated our clients' rights. In addition, you are reported to have publicly made defamatory statements concerning Stanley and Smith that you knew to be untrue in an attempt to support your decisions and actions.

On behalf of Stanley and Smith, we demand that they be immediately reinstated to their respective positions as Commanders of the Third and Fifth District. In addition, we demand that you issue a retraction, in the form of a press release subject to the approval of our clients, of the defamatory statements that you made concerning their job performance .

If we have not heard from you or your attorney within seven calendar days from today, or by 5 p.m. Wednesday, March 11, 1998, we will take that as a negative response to our demands, and proceed to avail our clients of their legal remedies .

Sincerely ,

Boraks & Jamnback

By John H. Hamnback, Esq.


cc: Winfred Stanley
Reginald Smith
Steve Leckar, Esq.

Back to top of page

Send mail with questions or comments to webmaster@dcwatch.com
Web site copyright ©DCWatch (ISSN 1546-4296)