PIB CTN # 2024-0239 . lof 31 To: Superintendent of Police Anne Kirkpatrick FROM: — Margaret Guidry, Attomey Transcendent Law Group, LLC (TLG) SUBJECT; PIB CTN # 2024.0239-P Jefirey Vappie, Employee ID # 08913, Senior Police Officer Executive Protection Unit (EPU) - RUI August 15, 2024 DATE: (2) INTRODUCTION On April 30, 2024, Captain Precious Banks of NOPD’s Public Integrity Bureau (PIB) received a written complaint (EXHIBIT D) from [i is lof the , with attached photographs (EXHIBIT E) identified with MCC Case #004-24-D and supplemental to another recent complaint under PIB CTN #2024-0211-P. The source of the photographs remains anonymous. The complaint raised concems that NOPD Officer Jefirey Vappie had been drinking wine at a bar with MayorLatoya Cantrell during the same period that he may have been on duty on July 28, 2022. Based on an initial evaluation of the complaint and the photographs provided by Mr. Captain Precious Banks of the Public Integrity Bureau initiated a departmental Formal Disciplinary Investigation and completed PIB Initial Intake form 230 (EXHIBIT C) on April 30, 2024. She additionally completed the Initiation of a Formal Disciplinary Investigation (EXHIBIT B) under PIB Control No. 2024-0239-P and the transmittal form (EXHIBIT A). The initial information identified the date and time of the alleged incident as July 28, 2022, at 8:19 p.m., and potential violations, including: V1: Rule 3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 1: Professionalism V2: Rule 3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 4: Accepting or Giving Anything of Value + V3: Rule 3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 8: Use of Alcohol or Drugs on Duty + V4: Rule 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty (C-6) to wit NOPD Chapter 13:38 Nepotism and Employment Conflicts; Employee Responsibilities, #10 The investigation was assigned to Transcendent Law Group, LLC, (TLG) by contract with the City of New Orleans. At the time of undertaking this investigation, Officer Vappie had been temporarily reassigned pending the outcome. Attomey Margaret Guidry of ‘Transcendent Law Group, LLC, was the primary investigator assigned by the law firm. 1 BRIEF SYNOPSIS; a ces: -:: of April 30, 2024, was reviewed by Captain Precious Banks of the Public Integrity Bureau. Investigator’s Initials:PIB CTN # 2024-0239. 2of3L The written complaint and attached photographs indicated that Officer Jeffery Vappie may have violated the NOPD's polices, rules, and regulations, while assigned to the Executive Protection Unit (EPU) responsible for protection of Mayor Latoya Cantrell. The alleged conduct included a lack of professionalism, consumption of alcohol while on duty, carrying a firearm while under the influence of alcohol, neglect of duty, and accepting gifts. This was derived from images allegedly showing Senior Police Officer Jeffrey Vappie seated with his protectee, Mayor Latoya Cantrell, at the bar of the Doris Metropolitan restaurant, located at 620 Chartres Street in New Orleans, Louisiana, at 8:19 p.m. on Thursday, July 28, 2022. The photographs appeared to show wine glasses containing a dark colored liquid on the bar directly in front of Officer Vappie and Mayor Cantrell 2. ALLEGATIONS: The initial allegations were supplemented and amended during the course of the investigation. On June 22, 2024, alleged violations of Louisiana criminal statutes were added. The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Louisiana and the Office of Independent Police Monitor were notified of these amendments. The criminal portion of the allegations were referred to the U.S. Attomey for investigation on June 25, 2024. Thus, the findings in this report are limited to administrative violations. The following is a comprehensive list of the rules, regulations, policies, and criminal statutes ultimately identified for investigation in connection with this complaint: + Rule #3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 1: Professionalism Rule #3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 4: Accepting or Giving Anything of Value Rule #3, Paragraph 8: Use of Alcohol or Drugs on Duty Rule #4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 3: Devoting Entire Time to Duty Rule #4: Performance of Duty: Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty (c-6) to wit NOPD Chapter 13:38 Nepotism and Employment Conflicts: Employee Responsibilities, #10 * Rule #4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c-6) to wit Chapter 46:6 Executive Protection of City Officials, paragraph #27 * Rule #4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c-6) to wit Chapter 13.15 Overtime Payment Requests, Paragraph 12- Accounting for Overtime Worked + Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (-6) to wit Chapter 13.37 Payroll and Timekeeping, Paragraph 3 + Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c-6) to wit Chapter 1.4 Authorized Firearms, Paragraph 61(A) La. R.S. 14:73.5, Computer Fraud (referred to the U.S. Attorney) La. R.S. 14:132: Injuring Public Records (referred to the U.S. Attorney) La. R.S. 14:133: Filing or maintaining false public records (referred to the U.S. Attorney) «La. RS. 14:138: Public Payroll Fraud (referred to the U.S. Attorney) Investigator’s Initials:PIB CTN # 2024-0239. 3 of 31 (0) INVESTIGATION: This Administrative Investigation was assigned to Transcendent Law Group, LLC. This investigator does not know all of the details of the referral, other than the date of May 15, 2024. On April 22, 2024, Officer Jeffery Vappie was administratively reassigned, pending multiple investigations, including the concurrent investigation designated PIB CTN#2024- 0211-P. After these investigations were well under way, notice was received on June 26, 2024, that Officer Jeffrey Vappie submitted retirement paperwork, effective June 29, 2024. The effective date of his retirement preceded the conclusion of this investigation. Prior to finalizing this report, Officer Vappie was indicted by a federal grand jury for allegations inclusive of an¢ relating to payments received from the NOPD for duty on the date of April 7, 2024, addressed in PIB CTN #2024-0211-P. Captain Precious Banks requested and obtained an extension for the completion of this investigation, which was granted. (EXHIBIT F) Throughout this investigation, Captain Precious Banks was extremely professional and went above and beyond to respond to and assist the investigator in procuring relevant evidence from the involved officers and answering questions about the NOPD and PIB procedures. i. Requests to Accused Officer Jeffery Vappie On May 17, 2024, Captain Precious Banks notified Officer Vappie via email (copying this investigator) of the assignment of the investigation to TLG and advised that his statement would be required. On June 4, 2024, this investigator made a direct request to Officer Jeffery Vappie for preservation and production of records via e-mail and certfied U.S. Mail, On June 11 and again on June 18 of 2024, this investigator emailed Officer Vappie to request availability for his recorded statement. in order to assist, Captain Precious Banks followed up by e-mail to Officer Vappie on June 24, 2024, (with copy to this investigator), again requesting production of documents identified in the previous correspondence. (EXHIBIT G) Officer Vappie did not respond to any of these inquiries, After receipt of notice of Officer Vappie's intent to retire, but prior to the effective date, this investigator received a call from Eric Hessler, attorney for Officer Vappie. On June 27, 2024, Mr. Hessler inquired whether the investigation would still be completed in light of Officer Vappie’s retirement and whether he could provide a statement in support of an appeal of any administrative determination. This investigator advised Mr. Hessler that the investigation would continue. Following that conversation, this investigator sent an e-mail to Officer Vappie and Mr. Hessler offering the opportunity to contact her by July 1, 2024, to schedule a voluntary statement and to provide documentation to be considered in the investigation by July 5, 2024. No response was ever received. On May 30, 2024, this investigator contacted Complainant (i GJ via telephone and ¢-mail to discuss the complaint and anonymous source of the / Investigator’s InitisPIB CTN # 2024-0239. 4 of31 photographs. Mr. {EE confirmed that the source of the photos would remain anonymous, but was not the same complainant associated with PIB CTN #2024-0211-P. Mr. (BE also directly forwarded the photographs (EXHIBIT E) and his written complaint to this investigator for review. The source reported that the photos were taken at Doris Metropolitan on the evening of July 28, 2022. Mr. [INI advised that he obtained the metadata with the photographs, which identified the date, time, and approximate location, at which they were taken, as seen below. ‘Thursday + Jul 28, 2022 + 8:19PM ‘Thursday + Jul 28, 2022» 8:20PM Adu ‘Apple Phone 12 ‘Apple Phone 12 The time indicated in the accompanying image of the phone's metadata indicates both photos were taken on July 28, 2022, at 8:19 p.m. and 8:20 p.m. respectively, in the New Orleans French Quarter. Both images show Mayor Cantrell and Officer Vappie apparently seated close next to each other at a bar with a wine glass positioned directly in front of Investigator’s InitialsPIB CTN # 2024-0239. Sof 31 them. The glasses contained a dark-colored liquid. Officer Vappie’s hand was on the glass stem in both images. He was wearing a button down, collared shirt with a pattern, but no jacket. In the foreground of one of the images, a glass of water can be seen positioned on the bar, indicating that the photo was taken from a position across from and facing them, An enlarged version of one of the photographs can be seen below. Request for Records and Interviews: Doris Metropolitan Doris Metropolitan is a steak restaurant at 620 Chartres Street in the French Quarter. Their website features an option to make a reservation online through Resy, but itis not clear if that was available in 2022. The numerous photographs and at least one video on their website and social media pages (Facebook and Instagram) feature the same background seen in the photographs submitted b including a pale colored wall with wine bottles positioned horizontally. (EXHIBIT |) Investigator’s InitialsPIB CTN # 2024-0239... 6 of 31 The below photograph from a Yelp review in May of 2023 also shows that a portion of the bar is backed by a wall with the same décor as that in the images provided by MCC. In the Initiation of a Formal Disciplinary Investigation, it is recorded that Sgt. Corey Lymous spoke to Doris Metropol = a (aaa advised that no videos were still available due to the passage of time in the intervening Investigator’s Initial:PIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 7 of 31 two years. The video recordings were deleted within 30 days. He suggested there was still a possibility of locating the receipt, if the last four digits of the associated credit card number was provided. However, the purchase would have to have been made via credit or debit card to be identifiable. Mr. = also recalled that an event for “Tale of the Cogktails” took place on that date at Doris Metropolitan This investigator reached out several times via telephone, U.S. Mail, and e-mail in attempts to obtain records and witness statements from Doris Metropolitan, to no avail (EXHIBIT H) Initially a letter was sent via certified U.S. Mail on May 21, 2024, including to the registered agent identified in the records of the Louisiana Secretary of State. No reply was received. In follow up, on June 6, 2024, the registered agent, also an attorney, advised that he was not representing the business in relation to this issue. When no reply was received and intervening attempts to reach the representatives by phone failed, this investigator followed up again via telephone and e-mail on the evening July 11, 2024. The following day, Mi replied via e-mail confirming that any video was deleted within one month of the occurrence and that no photos were available. He further stated that he would need specifics of the transaction in order to search for a receipt. Mr. [IMJ wrote that the Mayor does not make a reservation, but “always walks in.” He stated that they would be able to provide a statement or recall anything specific from two years ago, which seemed to imply the business would not be willing to participate in interviews. A subsequent attempt on August 2, 2024, by the investigator to request or at least confirm the availability of specific additional records or obtain statements failed to elicit a response. A review of the social media accounts of Doris Metropolitan revealed an advertisement for “Tales of the Cocktail’ to take place on July 29, 2022, which is the day after the photographs were purportedly taken. (EXHIBIT 1) iv. Review of Orleans Parish Civil Litigation This investigator also reviewed pleadings (EXHIBIT J) from the divorce proceeding titled, Danielle Dionne Watkins Vappie vs. Jeffery Paul Vappie, II, No. 22-10408 in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Officer Jeffrey Vappie's ex-wife Danielle Dionne Watkins Vappie filed a Petition for Divorce, alleging an ongoing affair since May of 2021 between Officer Jeffrey Vappie and a “Mrs. L.C.."It is notable that “Mrs.” is used, indicating that the alleged third party was married, as was Mayor Latoya Cantrell at that time. The initials would obviously be consistent with Latoya Cantrell. Several dates were cited by Officer Vappie’s former wife as dates on which the affair allegedly occurred, including August 1, 2, and 9 of 2022 and September 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of 2022. Notably, the dates of August 1, 2, and 9 and September 6-8 overlap with dates identified in the recent federal indictment. Investigator’s Initials:PIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 8 of 31 v. Review of EPU Time Sheets The Initiation of a Formal Disciplinary Investigation was accompanied by copies of time sheets and screenshots of the ADP system for Officer Jeffrey Vappie, Officer Robert Monlyn, and Officer Louis Martinez, taken by Captain Banks. (EXHIBIT K) These records confirm that Officer Vappie's time for July 28, 2022, was entered into the ADP system by Sgt. Tokishiba Lane-Hart on or about July 29, 2022. Officer Vappie's time sheet for July 28, 2022, reveals a scheduled shift from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., a total of 12 hours of time worked. The shift was divided into an ordinary period Of 9:00 a.m. to 5:35 p.m. and an overtime period from 5:35 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. The overtime period was referred to as °2™ Shift Unscheduled.” Officer Robert Monlyn’s time sheet for July 28, 2022, reflects a shift from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., a schedule running one hour earlier than his partner Jeffrey Vappie. Thus, at the time the photographs were purportedly taken, Officer Monlyn was already officially off the clock. The time sheet of Officer Louis Martinez did not reflect any scheduled or actually worked duty hours for that date. Analysis of the time sheets reveals that these three non-supervisory NOPD members of the EPU each had several scheduled twelve-hour shifts that week. When these non- supervisory officers worked on dates with a corresponding 12-hour scheduled shift, the full 12 hours (12:00) was added to their daily time. All of Officer Vappie's five shifts that week (two more than the others) were a full 12 hours, including on that Wednesday. Officer Louis Martinez and Officer Robert Monlyn each only had three twelve hour shifts that week and one shorter shift on Wednesday recorded as 8:35, rather than 12 hours. vi. Requests to Mayor Latoya Cantrell and City Attorney a, Request Process (EXHIBIT L) On May 30, 2024, this investigator submitted a public records request via the City Attorney's Office portal for records of the Mayor, her office, and the NOPD for expedited delivery. On June 4, 2024, this investigator issued a request to Mayor Latoya Cantrell directly via e-mail and certified U.S. Mail for preservation and production of records. On or about June 4, 2024, the City Attorney's Office requested that this investigator cancel the request made through the online portal. On June 5, 2024, this investigator issued a comprehensive non-public records request to the City Attorney via e-mail and certified US. Nail. No records were produced by the City Attorney's Office prior to the investigative interviews and, thus, were not available for preparation for or reference during the NOPD witness interviews. A limited number of calendar entries and e-mails were produced on July 17, 2024. The letter accompanying the response indicated potentially significant Investigator’s InitialsPIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 9 of 31 limitations on the search. Thus, the exclusion of relevant documents is a distinct possibility. The emails and texts produced by the Law Department were limited to emails of Officer Vappie for the period of July 1 through September 1, 2022, and contrary to TLG’s request, presumably did not include subsequent communications about the incident during the time period leading up to the initiation of this investigation. In addition, Mayor Cantrell's ‘own messages and those of her staff were not included, as a distinct item. Mayor Cantrell never responded to the request for an interview. On July 20, 2024, the City Attorney's Office forwarded an additional set of emails and text messages, which included some specifically from Officers Martinez and Monlyn. Due to the delay in both this investigation and PIB CTN #2024-0211-P, Officer Banks also assisted this investigator by issuing e-mails to the involved officers to produce a detailed set of documents, including e-mails and texts. At least one NOPD employee responded to Banks’ email, referring her to the City Attorney, who was preparing the responses. Sgt. Tokishiba Lane-Hart produced several documents directly to this investigator. Officer Banks was separately able to obtain a limited number of emails, through channels outside the City Attorney's Office, while the request to the City was pending. Notably, after the last production and despite reportedly being provided a copy of the forensically downloaded contents of Officer Vappie’s phone, the Law Department did not produce the contents to this investigator prior to the issuance of this report. Thus, any potentially relevant information not produced is unavailable for consideration in this analysis. b. Information Derived From Written Communications Some of Officer Vappie’s emails were produced, which provide some context for the events. (EXHIBIT N) Calendar entries were hard to follow because the date was not reflected in the .pdf copies. E-mails from July of 2022 refer to the planned World Cities Summit, scheduled to take place from July 31, 2022, through August 3, 2022. Copies of Airline ticket reservations from Going Places Travel, Inc., of Metairie, through the Mayor's Office gave further details. The reservations with Nippon Airways for Mayor Cantrell and Jeffery Vappie were made for roundtrip travel to Singapore, to begin early on the moming of July 29, 2022. The first series of flights was set to depart on July 29, 2022, at 7:15 a.m. from New Orleans to Houston IAH. However, an e-mail on July 20, 2022, from Catrina Simmons to a group, including EPU members notified them that the trip was cancelled. That was followed by an e-mail approximately 40 minutes later asking recipients to disregard the previous e-mail. On the following day, Ms. Simmons sent another e-mail announcing that the trip was “officially off." Then, approximately an hour and a half later, she sent another e-mail advising them Investigator’s InitialsPIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 10 of 31 to disregard the previous e-mail, adding “don't ask.” Just under an hour following that, she emailed again that the Singapore trip was to proceed and that the flights were booked. An e-mail containing Mayor Cantrell's schedule for July 28, 2022, (sent on July 27) identified official activities in the Mayor's Office and Mayor's Press room from 12:30 p.m. until 4:00 p.m. No activity was scheduled for the remainder of the day or evening of July 28, 2022. (EXHIBIT M) Reservations were prepaid for a stay at the Marina Bay Sands Hotel and Casino, an integrated resort in Singapore. The hotel is owned by the Las Vegas Sands. Photographs of the luxury hotel can be seen below. (EXHIBIT Z) According to their website, the massive hotel features impressive amenities, including, but not limited a rooftop park/observation deck, infinity pool, casino, and restaurants featuring celebrity chefs. i Me ull, His e-mails reveal that the total costs for the room and the roundtrip economy-class flight for Officer Vappie alone was $10,418.58, including $4,090.21 for the 5-night hotel stay. Remarkably, the reservation for Mayor Cantrell from Going Places Travel, Inc., does not include separate hotel accommodation. However, the total for her roundtrip business- class flight was $14,128.37. Investigator’s Initials/PIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 11 of 31 E-mails through mid-day on July 28 referenced preparations and scheduling for the Singapore the trip. However, at 8:17 p.m. on July 28, just minutes prior to the photos at Doris Metropolitan, Ms. Simmons e-mailed a contact, copying Jeffrey Vappie to advise that Mayor Cantrell would not be traveling to the Singapore meeting after all vii. Other Publicly Available Information Although not part of the documents produced by the Mayor's Office or the City, the following public statement was published online on July 29, 2022, (EXHIBIT O): Mayor's Office of Communications Issues Statement on World Cities Summit NEW ORLEANS — The Mayor's Office of Communications today issued the following statement on the World Cities Summit: “Mayor Cantrell has decided to forgo the climate change meetings at the World Cities Summit, and instead embed herself with the NOPD so she can witness firsthand what our officers need in order to increase public safety,” said Gregory Joseph, Director of Communications. The cancellation of the intended Singapore trip was reflected in multiple news publications on the same date. There was also significant press coverage in the same time frame of criticism related to the frequency and expense of the Mayor's travel. vill, Interview of Sgt. Tokishiba Lane-Hart Sgt. Lane-Hart provided a recorded administrative statement, which was later transcribed (EXHIBIT S) on July 9, 2024, in the presence of her counsel/representative Raymond Burkhart at the Public Integrity Bureau’s Offices at 1340 Poydras Street, Suite 1900. The ‘Sergeant confirmed she understood her rights under the Police Officer Bill of Rights. She was provided advanced written notice as a witness via a Notice to Render and signed the notice confirming receipt. (EXHIBIT P) ‘Sgt. Lane-Hart stated that she handled paperwork, such as payroll, training, and annual reviews for the EPU from approximately 2021 through 2023. However, at that time, she already had substantial responsibilities in her assigned position as Administrative Staff Sergeant for the Specialized Investigations Division, Thus, she was not actually assigned to the EPU and did not work with them in the field. She was not involved in the Mayor's scheduling. The previous EPU Sergeant, Wandell Smith, was removed by the Mayor for unknown reasons. Sgt. Lane-Hart replaced him in terms of overseeing the administrative portion of the supervisory work. When asked if there was any other supervisor to whom the EPU reported, she replied that they mainly answered to the Mayor. When asked why she ultimately stopped working with them, she said they needed a Sergeant embedded with them, which was a decision made by someone above her. Investigato:’s InitialPIB CTN # 2024-0239-, 12 of 31 Although the EPU did not check-in with Sgt. Lane-Hart on a daily basis, they would contact her to request sick leave or days off, usually by text or e-mail. She required their hours to be submitted in writing biweekly. The EPU shifts were 12 hours, except for 8 hours and 35 minute shifts on Wednesdays. When asked if they were permitted to be anywhere they wanted, even to go home, during the “standby” periods, she responded affirmatively. She denied knowing whether other NOPD officers are paid for standby time. When asked if standby time, while waiting for a call from the Mayor, would be paid overtime, she replied “no.” When asked whether they should have been paid for overtime, ifthey were home or somewhere else during standby mode, she replied that she would have to think about it. She said it would be difficult to answer whether they should be paid for the time spent at home or elsewhere, which did not include activity, such as training, for the benefit of the NOPD. She said that the difficulty was whether standby mode meant they were officially off the clock. Initially, the team consisted of Officers Louis Martinez, Christie Johnson, Robert Monlyn and an OPSO Deputy Charles Ellis. When Johnson left the group for personal reasons, she was replaced by Officer Vappie, who became Monlyn's primary partner. She does not know how selection of new members is made, but believes they are recommended by the Mayor ang the current EPU team members. When asked if she handled discipline, she stated that she never had that problem. When this investigator mentioned that Officer Vappie had previous disciplinary issues, she stated, “he did not have any that | recall.” Later in the interview, this investigator asked if she recalled the subject of the previous investigation of Officer Vappie, in which she gave a statement. She responded, “vaguely.” Though she did not accompany the EPU or observe them working in the field, she stated that she based the annual performance reviews on the lack of complaints. She denied having been aware of 2 relationship between the Mayor and Officer Vappie, having spoken to Officer Vappie or any EPU members about it, having been told by any NOPD officer about a relationship, or ever seeing them together. She agreed that aloohol on duly was prohibited, Sgt. Lane-Hart was not sure of the procedure for receipt of gifts, but said it has not come up as an issue for her before. Similar to the responses of interviewees in PIB CTN #2024-0211-P, she stated she did not know whether alcohol use could have adverse effects on the responsibilities of the EPU, the ability to adequately observe and respond, or to effectively use a firearm to protect the Mayor. She also did not know if there was any exception for the permitted consumption of alcohol by officers or if the Mayor had any authority to approve it. ix. Documents Produced by Sat. Tokishiba Lane-Hart Sgt. Lane-Hart provided several related documents directly to the investigator. These included text messages with Officer Vappie —— about biweekly time submissions during the summer of 2022. (EXHIBIT U) A text exchange on July 29, 2022, discussed the daily time entries for the period of July 24-30. Officer Vappie's initial email Investigator’s InitialPIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 13 of 31 ‘on July 29 failed to list the times or hours next to each date. After she pointed it out, Officer Vappie sent a set of time entries identified as July 13-19. Directly afterwards, he sent a message, “July 24-30,” apparently indicating a correction in the dates in the previous text. Officer Monlyn's texts about the week of July 24-30, 2022, indicated a shift from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Thursday, July 28. (EXHIBIT V) Officer Martinez's texts indicate he was not working on that date. (EXHIBIT W) Sgt. Lane also produced an e-mail dated February 23, 2021, from Paul M. Noel, Chief of Detectives for the NOPD, which stated that the then-Superintendent approved overtime work by the Mayor’s Security Detail "as necessary.” (EXHIBIT X) In CTN #2022-0566-P, Sgt. Hart provided a detailed and helpful statement, which was dated February 14, 2023. (EXHIBIT T) She brought the same statement with her in ‘support of her interview in the present investigation. She described the makeup of the EPU partner teams and their rotating schedule, as follows: The Officers work in 2 teams comprised of 2 Officers. On a daily base [sic] there are only 2 Officers protecting the Mayor. The team works on opposite days of each, except Wednesdays they will do different opposite shifts. The team's regular schedule is 12hours shifts for 3 days and they all work an 8:35hours shift on Wednesdays; totals worked a week is 4 days. Team A is NOPD Officers Monlyn and Vappie Team B is NOPD Officer Martinez and OPSCO Ellis, She also provided this table, which better illustrates the schedule: Mayor Security Detail Work Schedule Sun [Mon [Tue [Wed Thu [Fi [Sat Team A W (12) | W (8:35) (AorB W (12) | W (12) Shifts) TeamB | W(12) |W (12) W (8:35) (A or B we) Shifts) Sgt. Lane-Hart also identified several significant events during 2021-2022, which did not include July 28, 2022. x. Statement of Officer Robert Monlyn (Witness) On July 3, 2024, Officer Monlyn provided a recorded administrative statement (transcribed) (EXHIBIT R) in the presence of his attorney Ted Alpaugh! at the Public ' That interview was also taken in connection with another investigation of Officer Jeffery Vappie identified as PIB (CIN # 2024-021-P, Investigator’s Initial;PIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 14 of 31 Integrity Bureau's Offices at 1340 Poydras Street, Suite 1900. The original location of the interview was changed at the request of Mr. Alpaugh. Officer Monlyn confirmed he understood his rights under the Police Officer Bill of Rights. He was provided advanced written notice as a witness via a Notice to Render and signed the notice confirming receipt. (EXHIBIT P) He joined the NOPD in 1997, having been previously assigned to NOPD groups working at public housing complexes? the Eighth District, and the Intelligence Unit. The Intelligence Unit works with protection for visiting dignitaries. His strategic thinking relative to secutity issues in the protection sphere was evident in his detailed responses. In the past, on occasion, he provided executive protection detail for Mayor Landrieu and Mary Landrieu and had been assisting after Mayor Cantrell took office. His understanding was that the EPU members at the time were asked who they would like to join and they recommended him. He noted that disciplinary history is a factor in selection for the EPU. When he joined, the other EPU members included Officer Louis Martinez, Officer Christie Johnson Stokes, and OPSO Deputy Charles Ellis. None of these individuals remain on the unit, with Martinez having retired and Johnson-Stokes having left the unit due to a sick relative. He does not know the reasons for Deputy Ellis’ departure. Sgt. Gant replaced Wayne Jacque as supervisor of the EPU. However, Sgt. Tokishiba Lane-Hart was the supervisor during the majority of Officer Monlyn's time on the team. He described the scope of protection provided by EPU to include detailed “advanced work” related to security assessments at locations designated for appointments or events the Mayor was scheduled to attend. Careful awareness of the surroundings is essential. In the past, he was the primary partner to Officer Jeffery Vappie. Officer Monlyn has checked out both Tableau’ and Doris Metropolitan for the Mayor on other occasions. He said generally Mayor Cantrell would select her own seating. Officer Monlyn advised that an EPU member wants to be seated in a position that allows them to see all the entrances. When asked about safety concerns specific to venues like bars, he said where there was drinking, the EPU had to be on the lookout for persons with “false courage.” Primarily, the EPU standby periods require availabilty and can include completing required training and vehicle maintenance. The current EPU supervisor Sgt. Victor Gant enters their working hours into the system, assists with the advanced work, and fills in on the team. Sgt. Lane required members to submit daily time entries to her on a weekly basis, but was not part of the EPU in the field. Ordinarily, there are two members assigned together, but that may be increased, ifthreats are received. There are times when brief errands may only involve one member of the team. However, for a visit to a restaurant, Officer Monlyn would expect that his partner would let him know for safety reasons. Sgt. Gant is not necessarily advised of where they go, other than what is indicated on the schedule. Changes of plans are relayed by the * Officer Vappie was also at one point assigned to one of these units. ® Referenced in investigation PIB CTN #2024-0211-P. Investigator’s Initials:PIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 15 of 31 Mayor through the schedule, or by phone. He does not believe that the Mayor can authorize activity contravening NOPD policy. He acknowledged that alcohol use on the Executive Protection unit was prohibited because of its potential influence on the ability to effectively respond. Moniyn believed he had received training on the effects of alcohol and was aware that it could impair a person's judgment. He referred to individual alcohol tolerance, but stated that he personally does not drink and likely would not be able to function, if he did so. Officer Monlyn does not know if Officer Vappie drinks in his spare time. Officer Moniyn believed that relationships with protectees were prohibited. He also thinks there is an obligation by the involved officer to report a relationship. He stated that it would be difficult to separate a personal and professional relationship on the EPU and could be distracting or make the job difficult. However, Monlyn denied knowledge of a relationship between Officer Vappie and Mayor Cantrell, discussing the allegations, or discussing the divorce with Officer Vappie He acknowledged that there had been “talk” amongst members of the NOPD concerning assumptions that something was going on between them. However, he avoided identifying anyone in particular or elaborating, other than to refer to a previous discussion about Officer Vappie sitting with Mayor Cantrell in Houston's restaurant. That is likely in reference to the previous investigation PIB CTN #2022-0513-R. Officer Monlyn has eaten at the table with Mayor Cantrell, even alone, before. Who pays for the meal can vary. Officer Monlyn does travel with the Mayor, particularly after several local threats were received. However, he could not recall whether there were any threats being monitored on July 28, 2022. xi. Review of Disciplinary History of Officer Vappie The initial materials provided with the file included a history of sustained complaints about Officer Vappie, briefly summarized as follows: * 2013: Sustained Violation: Rule 4, Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4 — Neglect of Duty C(6) - Failing to comply with instructions, oral or written, from any authoritative source (One day suspension) * 2014: Sustained Violation: Rule 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4 - Neglect of Duty - Paragraph C: Subparagraph 7: Failing to take necessary actions so as to ensure that a prisoner shall not escape as a result of carelessness or neglect * 2017: © Sustained Violation: Rule 2: Moral Conduct: Paragraph 2 — Courtesy (none entered) © Sustained Violation: Rule 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4 - Neglect of Duty ~ Paragraph C: Subparagraph 1 — Failing to take appropriate and necessary police action (letter of reprimand) Investigator’s InitPIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 16 of 31 In addition, this investigator reviewed a copy of the investigative report under 2022-0513- R, (EXHIBIT Y) related to allegations in November of 2022, which sustained the following violations: * Sustained Violation: Rule 4 Performance of Duty; Paragraph 4 Neglect of Duty (c- 6), to wit, N.O.P.D. Chapter 22.08 Police Secondary Employment Paragraph 32: No member, including Reserve officers, shall work more than 16 hours and 35 minutes (16.58 hours) within a 24-hour period Sustained Violation: Rule 3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 1: Professionalism Sustained Violation: Rule 4 Performance of Duty, Paragraph 3: Devoting Entire Time to Duty The 2022-0513-R investigation was completed in March of 2023. However, no discipline was implemented due to delays, which fell afoul of the mandatory deadlines. Nonetheless, the statements and factual findings from that investigation are relevant to the issues presented here. That investigation included allegations of exceeding the maximum permitted working hours, attending a HANO meeting without the protectee (Mayor Cantrell) while on duty (being paid), and spending many hours with Mayor Cantrell in the Upper Pontalba Apartments during both on and off duty time, without other team members Significantly, investigators interviewed experts in training for protective service operations/dignitary protection, including John Douglass and Louisiana State Police Captain Dewight Robinette. Mr. Douglass trained many NOPD employees and had recently done so at the time of the interview. Both emphasized the importance of limiting interactions and communications with protectees to a professional capacity only. Additionally, Mr. Douglass cautioned against eating with the principal, even seated with safety in mind, which is part of the training provided. Similarly, Captain Robinette said the conversations should be limited to professional greetings and necessary communications between protectee and the executive, but should not extend to personal discussions. The protectee’ s living space would only be entered for security reasons. These protocols contrasted with the conduct of Officer Vappie described in that investigative report Both experts recommended embedding a supervisor in the group to ensure rules and regulation are followed. This clearly contemplated that the supervisor possess an independent authority to discipline and remove members of the unit. Interviews in that investigation also revealed that two EPU members in particular noticed conduct perceived to be inappropriately familiar. Orleans Parish Sheriff's Deputy Charles Ellis and Officer Louis Martinez, confronted Officer Vappie for sitting with the Mayor, behaving in an ‘overly charismatic manner’ and sitting with the Mayor with his back to the door. Martinez recalled specifically asking Vappie if he crossed the line with Mayor Cantrell, though Vappie reportedly denied it. Deputy Ellis told investigators that EPU members confronted Vappie as a whole regarding his conduct. We note that Deputy Ellis is no longer a part of the EPU. Investigator’s Initials:PIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 17 of 31 During the previous investigation, the supervisor at the time indicated that EPU members only went to the Pontalba as part of scheduled gatherings for special occasions. EPU members recommended candidates, who were interviewed and approved by the Mayor. It was subsequent to Vappie's entry into the EPU that they began accompanying the Mayor on her travels. In 2022-2023, while that investigation was pending, there were no standard operating procedures or regulations specific to the EPU. However, the Mayor was considered by those officers to be part of the chain of command or supervisor in her position above the Superintendent. Officer Vappie admitted that in addition to exercising with the Mayor, which might be appropriate, he also took showers and changed in the Pontalba. His time attending HANO meetings during duty time was unrelated to the NOPD and was not part of his EPU duties, as the Mayor was not present. In addition to the above, this investigator also recently issued an investigative report under PIB CTN #2024-0211-P. That determination may still be pending at the time of this report. That investigation concerned allegations related to Officer Vappie dining and drinking alcohol with Mayor Latoya Cantrell on April 7, 2024, while on duty and without any other EPU members present or apparently aware of it 1. WITNESSES: Former Officer Jeffery Vappie (not interviewed) Mayor Latoya Cantrell (not interviewed) Source of Photographs (unknown/not interviewed) Doris Netopia potentially other employees (not interviewed) v. Senior Police Officer Robert Monlyn vi. Sergeant Tokishiba Lane-Hart 2. CREDIBILITY i. Officer Jeffery Vappie: This investigator was not able to interview Officer Jeffrey Vappie due to his failure to respond to any of our requests and any of PIB's requests on our behalf. Notably, he submitted his retirement documentation within several days of the amendment of the allegations to include criminal violations. Furthermore, he was since indicted on federal charges related to his alleged romantic relationship with Mayor Latoya Cantrell and included reference to romantic text message exchanges with her a month preceding this incident. His motivations likely do not align with a thorough investigation and his credibility would be significantly diminished under the circumstances. ii, Mayor Latoya Cantrell: This investigator was not able to interview Mayor Latoya Cantrell due to the lack of response to the request. Given the recent indictment of Officer Vappie alleging a romantic relationship with her and the recent news reports indicating a pending indictment of Mayor Cantrell, she would have Investigator’ InitialsyPIB CTN # 2024-0239. 18 of 31 considerable motivation to downplay or conceal any information against her interest. Even had she participated, her credibility would be questionable. Officer Robert Montyn: Officer Monlyn is evidently an experienced NOPD Officer, particularly in the areas of Intelligence and protection. He had been a primary partner of Officer Vappie in the past. Although he was scheduled to work on July 28, 2022, the photographs are apparently from approximately 20 minutes after his scheduled shift ended. In addition, based on other available information, it seems that Officer Vappie was sometimes meeting Mayor Cantrell without the other EPU members. Thus, his lack of recollection of this specific incident may be reasonable. He acknowledged some of the internal conversations among EPU members regarding the controversy and accurately represented the NOPD policies. Though he hesitated to share some opinions or details, he was deemed to be credile overall. This investigator notes Officer Monlyn is still a member of the EPU in the group assigned to Mayor Cantrell. Thus, he is stil in close contact with the Mayor and under her scrutiny regularly. Though we have no information to suggest i, it is conceivable that he may either actually be under pressure or fear of negative consequences for his statements in this investigation, particularly considering the recent indictment of Jeffrey Vappie and the news reports suggesting an ongoing federal investigation of Mayor Cantrell, Sergeant Tokishiba Lane-Hart: The Sergeant's account of the EPU shifts and her limited, administrative-only supervision was overall consistent with those of other interviewees in this and CTN #2024-0211-P and seemed credible. The provision of e-mails and texts was extremely helpful. In addition, her comments about the standby time pay were not necessarily protective of the EPU, which suggests more honesty in that regard, However, her handling of the EPU annual evaluations without actually supervising or observing them in the field could suggest a mischaracterization of the degree of her involvement, a failure to actually supervise where expected, or simply a defect in the procedure/designation of responsibility without fault on her part. Furthermore, there is an undeniable contradiction between her statement that Officer Vappie did not have any discipline and her presentation to the investigator at the interview of her own formal response from Officer Vappie's previous disciplinary investigation. Thus, her credibility is in question to some degree, particularly where it specifically relates to Officer Vappie. AE A BEE 2s utimatly uncooperative in ferms of confirming some of the questions. However, he did acknowledge in an e- mail that Mayor Cantrell “always walks in” and suggested a receipt might be obtainable with the related credit card information. As this may be an establishment frequented by Mayor Cantrell, he may also have reason to limit his disclosures about it for professional reasons. The limited interaction with this investigator was insufficient to support a credibility determination. However, what was disclosed was not unreasonable and did not discredit him. Tnvestigator’s InitialsPIB CTN # 2024-0239-, 19 of 31 (c) SUMMARY Following the referenced interviews, this investigator reviewed the interview transcripts and other evidence gathered during the course of the investigation to determine whether the evidence was sufficient to establish the facts and elements of the violations alleged. This review included the transcripts of the interviews of current members of the EPU from PIB CTN #2024-0211-P, which were also taken by this investigator. This investigation presented some difficulty due to the passage of time, lack of cooperation from Doris Metropolitan, and the failure of the City Attorney's Office, Mayor Cantrell, and Officer Vappie to produce all documents requested or participate in an interview. Nonetheless, some determinations can be reached based on what is available. Of significance, {EEE Doris Metropolitan mentioned that the Mayor does not make reservations, but “always walks in,” which indicates that she frequents that establishment to such a degree that she has a noted pattem of conduct, of which he is aware. As stated, because no credit or debit card information was provided, this investigator was unable to pursue a search for the receipt for this transaction Nonetheless, the Mayor's regular patronage of this restaurant was confirmed by his comment. Several features of the EPU time records are notable. In addition to having more 12-hour shifts than the other EPU members that week, Officer Vappie's schedule on July 24, 25, and 28, 2022 was set to begin and end one hour later than his pariner Officer Robert Monlyn’s schedule, such that Officer Vappie might in theory be with Mayor Cantrell alone for the last hour of the shift. Further, Officer Vappie was scheduled for a full 12-hour shift on Wednesday, July 27, 2022, which is different from the 8 hour and 35-minute shift described by Sgt. Lane-Hart and recorded for Officers Monlyn and Martinez that day. 1. Was Officer Vappie on duty at the time of the meeting at the Doris Metropolitan Bar? Review of Officer Vappie's time sheets and ADP Payroll system screen shots and the text message exchanges with Sgt. Lane-Hart confirms that Officer Vappie's time entered for July 28, 2022, was 9:00 a.m. to 5:35 p.m. for an ordinary shift and 5:35 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. for an overtime shift. The text messages establish that he specifically provided the hours for July 28 to Sgt. Lane-Hart. This was not an automatic entry of 12 hours by the Sergeant, based on the schedule. Thus, Officer Vappie made specific representations that he was working at the time the photos were taken, which was 8:19-8:20 p.m. Officer Vappie texted Sgt. Lane-Hart his hours for July 28 on the following day, July 29, 2022. Thus, the likelihood of a mistaken recollection is significantly less. In the interviews of the EPU members in CTN #2024-0211-P, the NOPD witnesses supported that ‘standby mode’ is in actuality still “on duty,” compensated time. Officer Dace further stated that time spent with or eating with the Mayor was specifically not “standby mode.” The photographs demonstrate that he was with his protectee Mayor Investigator’s InitialPIB CTN # 2024-0239... 20 of 31 Cantrell at the time the photos were taken. Sgt. Lane-Hart denied that time spent by EPU members doing things without benefit to the NOPD and away from work would be compensated time. She attempted to qualify that by stating it depended on whether they were on the clock. Because Officer Vappie submitted his own time to his supervisor for compensation for duty, his own representation supports that he was “on the clock” during this period and, therefore, subject to the other rules. Therefore, this investigator determined by a preponderance of the evidence that Officer Vappie was on duty and compensated as an NOPD employee in the Executive Protection Unit at the time the photos were taken. 2. Did Officer Vappie solicit, accept or give anything of Value? The City Attorney advised that neither Officer Vappie, nor Mayor Cantrell possessed a City-issued card. Thus, it is most likely that this card was a personal card. No other credit card or debit card information was produced so that a search could be requested by Doris, Metropolitan, as the restaurant manager suggested might produce a result. It is important to mention that we did not receive a response from the Mayor's office to our request for an interview or for records. Thus, this investigator did not have an opportunity to review all of the pertinent evidence or to obtain a statement from Officer Vappie or Mayor Cantrell, concerning who paid for any entertainment on that occasion As discussed below, the applicable policy text fails to discuss giving anything of value, including defining a value threshold. Based on both the lack of sufficient evidence and the fault in the related rule, this investigator is unable to reach a conclusion on this issue. 3. Did Officer Vappie consume alcohol at Doris Metropolitan on July 28, 20227 The photographs provided by MCC depict Officer Vappie seated at a bar with a wine glass positioned in front of him on the bar. The glass appeared to contain a dark colored liquid, consistent with red wine. He had his hand on the glass in both photographs. The data submitted with the photograph shows a date of July 28, 2022. This investigator concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that Officer Vappie did drink alcoholic beverages at Doris Metropolitan on July 28, 2022 4. Was Officer Vappie authorized under NOPD policies and/or the Mayor's direction to imbibe alcohol or otherwise act in violation of NOPD policies and procedures? Although some NOPD interviewees in this investigation and related investigation PIB CTN #2024-0211-P mentioned that certain work within undercover narcotics might involve authorized alcohol use on duty, there was no evidence of express authorization by any member of the NOPD for Vappie to do so. Although the Mayor was “the boss,” she is not an “officer,” as described in the text of Rule # 3, Paragraph 8: Use of Alcohol or Drugs on Duty. The use of the term officer in the context of NOPD policy clearly indicates a member Investigator’s InitPIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 21 of 31 of the NOPD. Thus, it is the opinion of this investigator that Mayor Cantrell lacks the authority under this NOPD written policy to authorize alcohol use by a member of the Executive Protection Team, while on duty. There was no other evidence supporting another source of authority. Therefore, this investigator is convinced that Officer Vappie was not authorized to act ina manner contradictory to this Rule. The Mayor is authorized to direct the Executive Protection Unit to accompany her for security purposes to venues like restaurants or bars and to change her schedule at her discretion. Directing Officer Vappie to accompany her to Doris Metropolitan does not necessarily appear to have been beyond the scope of her authority. However, this investigator notes that no evidence was produced during the course of this investigation, which establishes whether the Mayor directed him to accompany her or whether he initiated this activity. Thus, it cannot be determined based on available evidence whether he acted under her direction on this occasion, 5. Did Officer Vappie enter a relationship “or other circumstance” with Mayor Cantrell, which might give the appearance of impropriety? The highly publicized allegations of Officer Vappie's relationship with Mayor Cantrell have been ongoing for a considerable time in the news media, including depictions of videos showing Officer Vappie with Mayor Cantrell exercising and apparently alone with her in the Pontalba apartments for significant periods. This was followed by the recent federal indictment of Officer Vappie, connected with a reported romantic relationship between the two, and which resulted in the online publication of an image of a romantic writing by Officer Vappie reportedly directed to Mayor Cantrell. In addition, this investigator considered the allegation of an extramarital affair in Officer Vappie's divorce proceedings, involving a woman identified only as °L.C.", which is consistent with the Mayor's initials and with the periods in which he was working on the EPU. Some of the dates mentioned in the divorce pleadings are also remarkably close to the date of July 28, 2022. The statements raised by Deputy Ellis and Officer Martinez in the investigation of just over a year ago clearly establish that the then-members of the EPU were extremely concerned and suspicious about Officer Vappie's personal interaction with Mayor Cantrell, which suggested a romantic relationship or “circumstance.” This investigator also references the circumstances raised in CTN #2024-0211-P. Comparison of the reservation records for the Singapore trip evidences only a single hotel accommodation under Officer Vappie's name. Although Mayor Cantrell’s fight reservation was forwarded to him, there was no corresponding separate hotel reservation in the records we were provided. This strongly suggests that their intent was to share a hotel room. When taking all of the information from the present investigation into account and comparing it with that alleged in the previous investigation, this investigator finds that more probably than not Officer Vappie entered a personal romantic relationship or ‘other Investigator’s Initials:PIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 22 of 31 circumstance" with Mayor Cantrell, which has been ongoing for several years and is part of a pattem of recurring conduct by Officer Vappie in relation to Mayor Latoya Cantrell. 6. Did Officer Vappie notify his supervisor of the relationship with Mayor Cantrell? Sgt. Tokishiba Lane-Hart and the present EPU supervisor Sot. Victor Gant both indicated they were unaware of any relationship and had not been advised of a relationship between Officer Vappie and Mayor Cantrell, Similarly, his co-workers on the EPU also claimed he did not report it to them in the investigation PIB CTN#2024-0211-P. Based on the witness statements, this investigator determined by a preponderance of the evidence that Officer Vappie did not report any relationship or other circumstance to his supervisors, including any connected with his visit to Doris Metropolitan on July 28, 2022. 7. Has Officer Vappie’s conduct brought discredit upon the NOPD or himself? Unquestionably, Officer Vappie's conduct has brought significant scrutiny upon himself, as well as the NOPD. As of the time of this writing, Officer Vappie has recently been indicted on and pleaded not guilty to federal charges related to these events, which followed extensive news reporting of his visits in and out of working hours with Mayor Cantrell, either for exercise or in the Pontalba. Based on statements taken during the previous investigation in 2022-2023, Officer Vappie's conduct was so flagrant in this regard that he was confronted about it by more than one member of the EPU, though he denied it. Concems about the nature of this conduct were previously addressed. Officer Vappie was both informed of the potential violations and had the opportunity to correct his behavior to be consistent with professional ideals and protocols for protective services. Furthermore, a number of NOPD employees are being investigated, required to undergo administrative interviews, and/or have had to retain counsel, including in investigations under PIB CTN #2024-0211-P, 2024-0334-P and 2024-0270-R, all linked to allegations related to Officer Vappie’s conduct in reference to Mayor Cantrell. This investigator determined based on a preponderance of the evidence that the circumstances support a finding that Officer Vappie has brought discredit to the NOPD and himself. 8, Was the Doris Metropolitan meeting with the Mayor entertainment or personal business, which might distract him from his duty? EPU members stated in interviews during this and PIB CTN #2024-0211-P that a single EPU member alone with the protectee was not the ideal circumstance from a security perspective. Thus, there is some degree of negligence indicated here in the failure to include another EPU member. This also evidences a lapse in judgment and services inconsistent with a high level of security. The NOPD Operations Manual Chapter 46.6, Executive Protection of City Officials, Paragraph 9, states, "A commissioned NOPD member assigned to the EPU will...(c) observe and respond as necessary for the protection of the Mayor... at special functions or events attended or visited by such officials.” Although this excerpt references specialPIB CTN # 2024-0239-. 23 of 31 events, the EPU members interviewed in the both this investigation and CTN #2024- 0211-P affirmed the importance of being able to conduct the advanced work, observe a crowd, select a secure position, and to react promptly. Officer Vappie's ability to sufficiently carry out those duties would have been significantly impaired by the distraction presented by conversing with the Mayor, by interactions with a romantic aspect, and by his consumption of alcohol. As seen in the photographs, Officer Vappie was not positioned such that he could always see persons approaching the Mayor by walking behind him, entering from his right. Considering the circumstances of his relationship or other circumstance with Mayor Cantrell, the apparent inattentiveness to security concerns, that they were both drinking wine and talking in close quarters, the time of the evening, the absence of any other EPU officers for support, and the social location, this investigator determined that Officer Vappie was engaged in personal entertainment at the time the photographs were taken. 9. Was Officer Vappie carrying a firearm, while under the influence of any amount of alcohol? ‘As demonstrated by the photographs, Officer Vappie was drinking at least one alcoholic beverage during the July 28, 2022, meeting with Mayor Cantrell at Doris Metropolitan. All of the EPU members’ statements in the related investigation PIB CTN #2024-0211-P confirmed that the EPU team carries their firearms at all times when on duty. Though carrying a firearm is required for members of the EPU on duty, there are no images of him with the firearm on this occasion and no witness statements to that effect. Approximately 4 hours passed between the last scheduled event on the Mayor's schedule for that day and the appearance of Officer Vappie at Doris Metropolitan with Mayor Cantrell. Although it is very possible that Officer Vappie would still have been armed, no confirmation was obtained in the course of this investigation. Thus, this investigator was not able to reach a conclusion about whether Officer Vappie was carrying a firearm, while under the influence of any amount of alcohol.* 10. Did Officer Vappie accurately record the overtime he actually worked on July 28, 20227 The officers’ statements in CTN #2024-0211-P established that EPU members are paid time and a half for overtime hours and never record time less than the scheduled 12 hours, absent a vacation or illness. However, at the time Sgt. Lane-Hart was administratively supervising the unit, she required them to submit their time in writing to her. As demonstrated by the text messages, Officer Vappie submitted duty hours, representing overtime through 9:00 p.m. on July 28, 2022. Were he on duty with the protectee without the firearm, he would have been transgressing the security policies described by the present EPU supervisor and other EPU team members, including In PIB CTN. #2024-0211-P. Alternatively, if he was carrying a firearm, he would be I violation of Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c-6) to wit Chapter 1.4 Authorized Firearms, Paragraph 61(A) Investigator’s InitialsPIB CTN # 2024-0239-« 24 of 31 Based on Officer Vappie’s actions in the photos of personal entertainment and consumption of alcohol, conduct inconsistent with the responsibility of an EPU member, Officer Vappie was likely not actually performing and may in theory have been incapable of performing protection work or services beneficial to the NOPD, while drinking wine with Mayor Cantrell at Doris Metropolitan at our about 8:00 p.m. on July 28,2022. Thus, the evidence demonstrates by a preponderance that overtime recorded at or around 8:00 p.m. on July 28, 2022, was inaccurate, Based on this administrative investigation, this investigator concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that Officer Jeffery Vappie violated New Orleans Police Department rules and policies. (d) RECOMMENDATIONS a. Sustained Dispositions RUI - SUSTAINED: Rule #3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 1: Professionalism Text: "1. Employees shall conduct themselves in a professional manner with the utmost concern for the dignity of the individual with whom they are interacting. Employees shall ‘not unnecessarily inconvenience or demean any individual or otherwise act in a manner which brings discredit to the employee or the New Orleans Police Department.” Reasons: The evidence demonstrates by a preponderance of evidence that Senior Police Officer Jeffery Vappie violated this rule, when on July 28, 2022, Officer Vappie drank wine with Mayor Cantrell in public and conducted himself in a manner inconsistent with the professional demeanor expected of an on-duty NOPD officer, with the protocols of the EPU, while drinking alcohol, and while being paid for being on duty. The findings of this investigation indicate this is part of a pattern of conduct over several years, which has resulted in highly publicized criticism and scrutiny of Officer Vappie himself and of the New Orleans Police Department and already the subject of a previous investigation. RUI- SUSTAINED: Rule # 3, Paragraph 8: Use of Alcohol or Drugs on Duty ‘Text: “Members shall not drink intoxicating beverages or consume Schedule |, Il, Il, 1V or V, legal or illegal drugs, while on duty, except in the performance of duty and while acting under proper and specific orders trom a superior officer. Members shall not appear for duty, or be on duty, while under the influence of intoxicants or drugs to any degree whatsoever, or with an odor of alcoholic beverage on their breath.” Reasons: The evidence demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that Senior Police Officer Jeffery Vappie violated this rule on July 28, 2022, when he drank one or more glasses of wine at Doris Metropolitan, while on duty, and that he was under the influence of alcohol to at least some degree, while on duty. Investigator’s Initials’PIB CTN # 2024-0239-— 25 of 31 RUI - SUSTAINED: Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 3: Devoting Entire Time to Duty Text: “Employees shall not read, play games, watch television/movies, or otherwise engage in entertainment while on duty, except as may be required in the performance of duty, or by authority of their respective Bureau Chief. They shalll not engage in activities or personal business which would cause them to neglect or be inattentive to duty’ Reasons: The evidence demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that Senior Police Officer Jeffery Vappie violated this rule on July 28, 2022, when he drank one or more glasses of wine at Doris Metropolitan, while on duty, and that he was under the influence of alcohol to at least some degree, while on duty. This likely inhibited his ability to remain attentive to duty, to react, and constituted obvious neglect of duty, as a member of the Executive Protection Unit, while with his assigned protectee. RUI- SUSTAINED: Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c- 6) to wit Chapter 13.15 Overtime Payment Requests, Paragraph 12- Accounting for Overtime Worked Text: “Falling to comply with instructions, oral or written, from any authoritative source.” “Employees are to record the actual time worked in an overtime status.” Reasons: The evidence demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that Officer Vappie violated this rule because his time sheet/work record for July 28, 2022, which he actually submitted to Sgt. Lane Hart and otherwise endorsed, represented that he was working overtime after 4:35 p.m. In fact, the evidence clearly demonstrates that Officer Vappie was actually not working, but instead participating in personal entertainment with no benefit to the New Orleans Police Department or the Executive Protection Unit during that period. The time records did not accurately reflect his actual time worked. RUI- SUSTAINED: Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c- 6) to wit Chapter 13.37 Payroll and Timekeeping, Paragraph 3 Text: “Failing to comply with instructions, oral or written, from any authoritative source.” “As such, every City employee is required to: (a) Personally and accurately record time, attendance, and leave used on a biweekly (or weekly basis if applicable), and (b) Approve his/her time at the end of each pay period.” Reasons: The evidence demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that Officer Vappie violated this rule because his time sheet/work record for July 28, 2022, which he would have to have approved in the ADP payroll system, represented that he was working overtime after 4:35 p.m. In fact, the evidence Investigator’s Initials:PIB CTN # 2024-0239-5 26 of 31 clearly demonstrates that Officer Vappie was actually not working, but instead participating in personal entertainment with no benefit to the New Orleans Police Department or the Executive Protection Unit during that period. The time record did not accurately reflect his attendance or time worked. RUI - SUSTAINED: Rule # 4: Performance of Duty: Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty (c- 6) to wit NOPD Chapter 13:38 Nepotism and Employment Conflicts: Employee Responsibilities, #10 Text; "Failing to comply with instructions, oral or written, from any authoritative source.” “Prior to entering into any personal or business relationship or other circumstance that the employee knows or reasonably should know could create a conflict of interest, the appearance of impropriety, or other violation of this chapter, the employee shall promptly notify his/her uninvolved, next highest level supervisor.” Reasons: The evidence demonstrates by a preponderance of evidence that Senior Police Officer Jeffery Vappie violated this rule on an ongoing basis, including on July 28, 2022, by failing to report to his supervisor that he had become involved in an ongoing relationship or other circumstance with Mayor Latoya Cantrell, which created the appearance of impropriety. Based on the prior investigations, this appears to be part of a pattern of conduct. Senior Police Officer Jeffery Vappie may have also violated Rule IX of the Civil Service Rules for the City of New Orleans, relative to Maintaining Standards of Service. b. Other Dispositions RUI - NOT SUSTAINED: Rule # 3: Professional Conduct, Paragraph 4: Accepting or Giving Anything of Value ‘Text: “Members, in their official capacity as employee(s) of the City of New Orleans, shall not solicit or accept from any person(s), business(es), organization(s), or court(s) any gift, donation, good, money, property (tangible, intangible, real or personal), loan, promise, service, or entertainment for the benefit of the employee(s) or the Department without the expressed written approval of the Superintendent of Police. Requests for such approval shall be forwarded to the Superintendent of Police through the employee's chain of command using a NEW ORLEANS POLICE DEPARTMENT form 105 (Interoffice Correspondence). Under no circumstances shall a gift, donation, good, money, property (tangible, intangible, immovable or movable), loan, promise, service, or entertainment be solicited or accepted by any members of the Department if it is reasonable to infer the person, business, or organization: + seeks to influence action of an official nature or seeks to affect the performance or non- performance of an official duty, or Investigator’s InitialPIB CTN # 2024-0239- 27 of 31 + has an interest which may be substantially affected directly or indirectly by the performance or non-performance of an official duty.” Reasons: A violation of this rule was not sufficiently established during the investigation in significant part due to a deficiency in the text of the rule. The title of the rule mentioned “Giving,” but the text of the rule does not actually discuss “giving” of something of value as a violation. Due to this inconsistency, the violation could not be sustained. RUI - NOT SUSTAINED: Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c-6) to wit Chapter 46:6 Executive Protection of City Officials, paragraph #27 Text: “Failing to comply with instructions, oral or written, from any authoritative source.” The Mayor of the City of New Orleans or a designated authority will direct EPU members and as it relates to the daily schedule of the Mayor's Office, but in no case shall such direction conflict with NOPD policies, directives, and procedures. Reasons: The investigation did not sufficiently establish whether Vappie was acting on the Mayor's instructions or at her direction in his presence or conduct at Doris Metropolitan on July 28, 2022, though it is possible. RUI — NOT SUSTAINED: Rule # 4: Performance of Duty, Paragraph 4: Neglect of Duty, (c-6) to wit Chapter 1.4 Authorized Firearms, Paragraph 61(A) Text: "Failing to comply with instructions, oral or written, from any authoritative source. *Guidelines for the safe handling and carrying of firearms include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) Firearms shall not be carried by any officer who has consumed any amount of alcoholic beverage or taken any drugs, including current prescription medications for that member that may adversely affect the officer's senses or judgment’ Reasons: The evidence was insufficient to establish beyond a preponderance of the evidence that Senior Police Officer Jeffery Vappie violated this rule on July 28, 2022, when he drank one or more glasses of wine at Doris Metropolitan. Although the procedures followed by the EPU include carrying a firearm at all times, while on duty, the images do not depict a firearm. The only evidence supporting the presence of the weapon is the rule/policy requiring him to do so. Thus, this violation could not be sustained due to insufficient supporting evidence. c. Possible Violations Raised In this Investigation Although not the subject of this investigation, the findings raise the possibility of an additional violation of NOPD Rules regarding dishonesty, particularly related to the previous investigation CTN #2022-0513-R, including related to his relationship or other Investigator’s Initials: