All allegations in a lawsuit filed against the city of Roanoke Rapids by former Chief Bobby Martin are denied, the answer to his complaint filed Tuesday in Halifax County Superior Court says.
In the answer filed on behalf of the city by Katie Weaver Hartzog of the Raleigh-based Hartzog Law Group, the document says that Martin’s employment was terminated for valid reasons and that in his lawsuit he fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted and his claims should be dismissed in whole or part.
Martin claims in the complaint that his termination by City Manager Kelly Traynham was malicious and corrupt and that it was motivated by personal desire to protect a department head, protect her advantageous political connections with the department head and other local politicians to retaliate against him for following legitimate and valid actions.
“(The) defendants, having complied in good faith with all applicable laws and regulations and having so complied, acted without improper motive, and any injury accruing to plaintiff,” the answer says.
Prayer for relief
In its prayer for relief the answer says the defendants request that Martin recover nothing from them and that the costs of the action be taxed against him. The prayer for relief asks for a trial by jury and any further relief the court might deem.
Besides the city and Traynham, who is being sued in her individual and official capacities, Martin’s complaint names the Richardson and Davis Investigative Consulting Group and Richardson, Davis and Forest Investigative Consulting Group.
The consulting group investigated allegations of policy violations which led to the firings of Martin and his second in command — Captain Jamie Hardy — in April of last year.
The city has waived its governmental immunity only to the extent the claims are indemnified through the purchase of insurance.
Department head
In references of an unnamed city department head in Martin’s complaint, the answer first addresses that, during the investigation conducted by Richardson and Davis, Hardy reported that, in or around November 2021, he was approached by a detective from the Roanoke Rapids Police Department that his stepdaughter heard from a friend that the department head possibly made inappropriate comments to her. “According to Richardson and Davis's investigation report, Hardy told the investigators that he interviewed the female juvenile teen in the presence of her mother and that she made no accusation to Hardy that the department head had said anything inappropriate or sexual in nature to her. According to Hardy, the female juvenile teen's only indication to Hardy was that she felt somewhat uncomfortable about texting with the department head.”
As far as the allegation of the department head walking into a room where teenagers were changing, the answer says, “It is denied that Hardy told investigators that the department head ‘knew’ the teenagers were undressed or that this was done intentionally.”
The answer admits that Hardy obtained a search warrant to obtain the department head's Facebook messages and that the police department reported to Traynham that the department head possibly used marijuana based on the content of the Facebook messages. “Outside of the reports from the police department, there was no evidence that the department head was under the influence of any impairing substance at work.”
In addressing a purported untoward picture of Sharon Stone from the movie Basic Instinct being sent to the city manager by the department head “in reference to someone being flashed at a meeting,” it is denied that the picture was sexually graphic, the answer says. “It is admitted that Traynham stated that she and the department head made a great team, however, this comment was made in the context of a separate, later conversation.”
The answer says the city manager was never made aware of any reports that people were having sex in the department head’s remodeled building, which Martin charged in his complaint employees called the boom boom room. “The plans for the remodeling of the department head's building were approved before Traynham became manager,” the answer says.
Meeting about department head
A meeting was held to discuss the police department's investigation of the department head at the city attorney's office. Martin, Hardy, Traynham and the City Attorney Geoffrey Davis attended. “It is denied that Traynham saw the department head's Facebook messages,” the document said. “It is admitted that the city had no information showing that the department head had violated the city's substance abuse policy or that he committed any violation of the law within the city's jurisdiction.”
The matter was turned over to the Halifax County Sheriff’s Office because the city had no jurisdiction over the department head's activities in his home and because the police department's ongoing investigation of the department head created a conflict of interest.
Martin and Hardy met with law enforcement officers from the HCSO, including then-Lieutenant Shane Guyant — now the city’s police chief — to discuss the referral of the police department's investigation of the department head. “It is admitted that Guyant expressed distrust of (the) plaintiff and Hardy because of the circumstances of their request and because Hardy had requested an illegal search warrant in the past. It is further admitted that Guyant expressed concern about devoting police resources to the purported possession of a user amount of marijuana when there were more important crimes to investigate.”
The answer says that Traynham had no basis to have the department head drug tested under the city's policy and the answer denies that Traynham committed any violation of city policy. The answer denies that the city manager ever spoke with the department head regarding her conversation with Guyant until after Martin told the department head he had been cleared in November of 2022.
The response admits that former HCSO Chief Deputy Corey Dixon reported to investigators that he tried to look up an Originating Agency Case number, commonly referred to as OCA, for the department head after he received notification from Facebook that a search warrant had been obtained. “It is specifically denied that Traynham shared information with the department head.”
Scrap metal
The response addressed the purported theft of scrap metal by Roanoke Rapids Graded School District maintenance personnel and a Crimestoppers tip reported by School Resource Officer Bruce Temple to the HCSO.
A state auditor’s report cleared the school system of any wrongdoing.
Martin sent a letter to RRGSD Superintendent Julie Thompson regarding his findings on the Crimestoppers tip. “Upon information and belief, Martin based a portion of the text of this letter on a list of talking points initially provided by Superintendent Thompson, which the plaintiff used when he composed his letter of September 6, 2022 to send back to the superintendent.
“It is admitted that Traynham was displeased with Martin's letter because it was not the business of law enforcement to get involved with a personnel issue of an outside agency. Traynham had warned the plaintiff to stay out of this internal personnel matter and he acted outside the scope of his authority in sending the letter before obtaining her approval.”
Temple was initially terminated but later reinstated.
The response admits that Thompson told the SRO's she did not want them to investigate the matter involving the scrap metal and contacted Martin to initiate an investigation. “It is further admitted upon information and belief that Superintendent Thompson spoke with Facilities Director (Robbie) Clements regarding the allegations,” the document states. “It is admitted upon information and belief that Facilities Director Clements brought over approximately $14,000 in cash that had been kept in a safe. It is further admitted based upon information and belief that Superintendent Thompson did not investigate this matter further and she informed the SROs that the investigation was closed.”
Martin assigned Hardy to handle the scrap metal investigation and lined up the interviews of the maintenance staff without consulting with Hardy. “It is further admitted upon information and belief that the assistant district attorney that Hardy spoke with was not given all of the necessary information before advising that she did not think this matter should be prosecuted.”
Says the response: “It is admitted that Hardy interviewed the SROs in November 2022 after Traynham, having heard concerns that the investigation still remained open and that the SROs had not been interviewed, told Martin that the matter needed to be concluded.”
Traffic stop
Martin initiated a traffic stop of a vehicle that had been parked at the department head's building.
Officer Scott Blythe reported to Hardy that he saw a vehicle parked next to the department head's vehicle and that Hardy ran the tag on the vehicle.
Martin was aware that the female operating the vehicle was someone the department head had communicated with on Facebook. Martin had two officers pull over the vehicle.
The female driver was in possession of the department head's badge, which Martin confiscated. “... The female operator stated that she was at the building to do her laundry and that she needed to leave to buy more detergent.”
Martin’s termination
Roanoke Rapids City Council supported Traynham's decision to terminate Martin's employment, the response says. “It is admitted that the city hired R&D to conduct an independent investigation into the alleged actions, inactions, and/or policy violations by the executive management staff at the Roanoke Rapids Police Department.”
The response says, “It is admitted that Traynham told (the) plaintiff that the city had hired an independent investigative firm to look into the complaints the city had been receiving regarding the police department. It is further admitted that (the) plaintiff was not under investigation.”
The city's personnel policy governed this investigation.
The R&D report was submitted to the city manager and on April 4 of last year she sent Martin a notice of a pre-disciplinary conference. “In response to the pre-disciplinary conference notice, (the) plaintiff reviewed the investigative report and supporting evidence and provided a rebuttal to the findings at the pre-disciplinary conference held on April 19, 2023.”
The city council continued to support Martin’s termination.
As far as his termination the response says the state statute involving willfully failing to discharge duties speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its content.
The answer denies that Martin was terminated because of the department head’s marijuana issue. “It is admitted that (the) plaintiff was directed to turn this matter over to an outside agency for investigation due to the conflict of interest and because the city had no jurisdiction to investigate the department head at his home.”
As far as the scrap metal investigation, the response says that Martin “is guilty of willfully neglecting his duties in failing to either refer this matter out for investigation, or to ensure the scrap metal theft was properly investigated after it was undertaken by the department. It is denied that (the) plaintiff's job responsibilities included becoming involved in a personnel matter outside the city.”
Missing equipment
As far as missing equipment, the response says Martin did fail to take action, but is denied that is the reason he was terminated.
“It is denied that Traynham engaged in any malicious or corrupt behavior,” the response says.
R&D investigation
“The city expected that the investigation would be conducted with due care and in an unbiased manner. It is admitted that (the) plaintiff’s employment was terminated, in part, due to the R&D investigation findings, but (were) also based on (Traynham’s) personal observations of (Martin’s) job performance and her lack of confidence in his ability to effectively lead the police department. (The) plaintiff's constitutional rights were not violated and he has an adequate state remedy.”
