Police Chief Fires Detective Charged With Tampering With Evidence

Tampa FL

08 January, 2021

5:59 PM

Description

TAMPA, FL — Suspended Tampa Police Detective Jarda Bradford, 38, was fired Friday following her arrest on felony tampering with evidence charges. During a news conference Friday, Tampa Police Chief Brian Dugan said Bradford altered documents in a Tampa Police Department fatal shooting case investigation and then submitted the altered documents as official evidence. "You hear a lot about officers having a duty to intervene when they see wrongdoing," Dugan said. "This information was brought forth by fellow detectives. If we, as law enforcement, want the community to trust us, they have to know that when we find cops who do wrong that we are going to hold them accountable." On Oct. 17, Bradford, who has been with the Tampa Police Department since 2010 and had been promoted to detective three months before, was assigned to be the primary detective in an attempted homicide investigation that took place in the 1700 block of West Waters Avenue in the early morning hours. A suspect was identified and several residents who witnessed the shooting were ultimately shown a photo array that included a photo of the suspect. Photo arrays are required to be fair and impartial. Easily distinguishable characteristics are cropped or blacked out to ensure that the suspect does not stand out from other people in the photo lineup. The photo arrays in this case were created by Bradford. She requested an officer show one of the photo packs to a witness. The officer showed the witness the photos in the lobby of the police district office but the witness was not able to identify anyone. The officer returned the photo pack to Bradford and told her that the witness couldn't identify anyone. Shortly after receiving the photo pack from the officer, Bradford discovered the witness had not put her initials on each photo as required. On Oct. 20, Bradford uploaded a version of the witness photo pack to her report but this version had the initials of witness on all the photos. A review of the officer's body-worn camera recorded the witness signing and initialing two partially pre-filled Tampa Police Department administration forms. However, the footage showed the witness did not put her initials on the photos. In a recorded interview, the witness reviewed the body-worn camera footage and said it reflected the day she was shown the photo array by the officer. However, the witness said she never initialed the photos. During the interview, the witness examined the initials on the photos that Bradford submitted as evidence and said it wasn't her handwriting. A copy of the photo array without the initials had been uploaded to a computer drive that only Bradford had access to on Oct. 17 and a second photo array with the initials was uploaded on Oct. 20. On Oct. 26, Bradford officially submitted the initialed photo array to the Tampa Police Department property/evidence section. Also, on Oct. 22, Bradford requested a detective show a photo array to another witness, and left the photo array on her desk for the detective to retrieve. The next day, the detective requested an uninvolved detective assist her with administering the photo array. The uninvolved detective had no knowledge of the case or the suspect. Both detectives met with the witness at her home. The witness picked out a photo and commented on the earrings the person was wearing. This concerned the detectives because they were aware that earrings, tattoos and other easily identifiable details should have been cropped or blacked out on the photo array before showing it to the witness. The detectives reviewed the photos and discovered the earrings/earlobe area on all the photos in the array had not been blacked out. They notified their supervisor of the error and returned to the Tampa Police Department District 2 office where they secured the photo array in a locker. They also emailed Bradford and told her where she could find the photo pack. On Oct. 27, the detective who placed the photo array in the locker returned to work and discovered the photo pack was still in the locker. She asked Bradford to join her at the locker to retrieve the photo array. When Bradford accepted the photo array, the detective told her that the earrings had not been blacked out as required. Bradford said she forgot to black out the earrings on the photos before leaving it on her desk for the detective to retrieve. However, on Oct. 27, the photo array for the second witness was scanned and emailed to Bradford with the earrings and ear lobes on the photos blacked out. On Dec. 4, detectives interviewed the second witness at her home and, in a sworn statement,the witness said the photos she viewed and initialed on Oct. 23 did not have the earrings or ear lobes blacked out. Bradford was arrested and charged with two counts of tampering with evidence. "Tampering with evidence corrupts our judicial process. And when a law enforcement officer betrays the badge, it erodes trust in the integrity of our entire system," Hillsborough County State Attorney Andrew Warren said. "It doesn't matter who you are, whether you wear a badge or not, if you break the law, you must be held accountable." Bradford's attorney, Richard Escobar, believes Bradford will be exonerated, saying she did not receive proper training before she was made lead detective on the homicide case. The internal investigation also concluded that Bradford violated the following police department and city of Tampa policies and procedures: Tampa Police Manual of Regulations 1005: Standard of Conduct;Tampa Police Manual of Regulations 1107.02: Truthfulness in DepartmentalMatters;Tampa Police Manual of Regulations 1807: Failure to Comply with DepartmentalPolicies; to wit: Standard Operating Procedure 819 - Guidelines for EyewitnessIdentification and Photo Line-Up;Tampa Police Manual of Regulations 1202.02: Incompetence;City of Tampa Personnel Manual B28.2A(3)d(1): Moral Turpitude; andCity of Tampa Personnel Manual B28.2A(3)(a)1: Incompetence.