Niagara Gazette

Local News

January 23, 2014

Lewiston officials decline release of details in officers' conduct case.

Niagara Gazette — TOWN OF LEWISTON — Town officials still aren’t discussing the conduct of a pair of police officers who were the subject of an internal investigation last year.

Under a state statute dating back to the 1970s, they are under no legal obligation to do so. 

Civil Rights Law section 50-a requires “all personnel records, used to evaluate performance toward continued employment or promotion” for first responders to be “considered confidential and not subject to inspection or review without the express written consent of such police officer, firefighter/paramedic, correction officer or peace officer within the division of parole except as may be mandated by lawful court order.”

In recent weeks, Town Attorney Mark Davis and members of the town board have repeatedly cited the statue while declining comment on the specific nature of last year’s investigation, which they have acknowledged involved the Niagara County District Attorney’s Office and the New York State Police. 

“It’s a state statute that I’m not allowed to comment on this matter,” Councilman Michael Marra said last week. 

Town officials confirmed in October that two members of the town’s police force were investigated for unspecified “allegations.” They have declined comment on the specific nature of the “allegations,” although they are believed to have been tied to the officers’ access to the town’s fuel supply station on Swann Road. 

“I don’t think we ever ran from that,” Councilman Ernest Palmer said last week. “But it never went through the criminal justice system. So all we can really say is there were some allegations.”

The investigation followed the installation of surveillance equipment near the town fuel pumps last year. The source of the equipment, which has since been removed, is also not being discussed publicly by town officials.

In a 2011 audit, the New York State Comptroller’s Office questioned the internal controls over the town’s fuel supply. At the time, state auditors indicated that they found “no evidence of criminal activity” during their review of the town’s operations and finances.  

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Local News
Featured Ads
Seasonal Content
House Ads
AP Video
Traditional African Dishes Teach Healthy Eating The Carbon Trap: US Exports Global Warming 13 Struck by Lightning on Calif. Beach Baseball Hall of Famers Inducted Israel, Hamas Trade Fire Despite Truce in Gaza Italy's Nibali Set to Win First Tour De France Raw: Shipwrecked Concordia Completes Last Voyage Raw: Sea Turtle Hatchlings Emerge From Nest Raw: Massive Dust Storm Covers Phoenix 12-hour Cease-fire in Gaza Fighting Begins Raw: Bolivian Dancers Attempt to Break Record Raw: Israel, Palestine Supporters Rally in US Raw: Air Algerie Flight 5017 Wreckage Virginia Governor Tours Tornado Aftermath Judge Faces Heat Over Offer to Help Migrant Kids Kangaroo Goes Missing in Oklahoma More M17 Bodies Return, Sanctions on Russia Grow Raw: Deadly Tornado Hits Virginia Campground Ohio State Marching Band Chief Fired After Probe Raw: Big Rig Stuck in Illinois Swamp
Opinion
House Ads
Night & Day
Twitter News
Follow us on twitter
Hyperlocal Search
Premier Guide
Find a business

Walking Fingers
Maps, Menus, Store hours, Coupons, and more...
Premier Guide
Front page
Poll

Do you think cigarette sales to non-Native American customers should be taxed on reservations?

Yes. Items should be taxed like they are everywhere else.
No, the indian reservations are sovereign land and they are selling them on their land.
Not up to me. Native Americans decide the rules on their land.
Don't care. Smoking isn't good for you.
     View Results