Investigative Reporters and Editors, Inc. The IRE Journal, May/Jun 2002 by Lanosag, Gerry, Johnston, Kathleen
Undercover work shows sheriff drinking, driving
For investigative reporters looking to expose wrongdoing or abuse of power, rule number one is to follow the money. But some stories call for literally following someone. That was the case with WTHR's investigation into one of the most powerful politicians in Indiana--Marion County Sheriff Jack Cottey. The provocative story we came up with showed how old-fashioned techniques like undercover surveillance - when done right-can provide evidence that documents and databases can't.
The story started, as you might expect, with a tip - that Cottey was regularly drinking, often during the workday, and then driving his county car. Actually, there were numerous tips. Given the sheriff's past problems with drinking on duty (he admitted as much in an old newspaper article, READ IT HERE), it was worth taking a look.
Our first order of business was to map out how to do such a sensitive and potentially explosive story. Our station sets a high standard for using undercover video. Generally, the standard is that we will use the technique when the information needed for the story can't be gathered in any other way. That was certainly the case with this story.
We also decided that it wouldn't be enough to see the sheriff going into a bar a couple of times. Rather, we had to be inside on repeated occasions and witness the liquor being poured into the glass and the glass going to his lips. With that dictate, we began an intensive undercover effort.
It quickly became clear that having one or two people undercover was not going to be sufficient for the task. To obtain the video evidence we wanted, our people - equipped with hidden cameras - were required at times to be in very close proximity to Cottey. Consequently, we were forced to substitute new faces for the inside surveillance work every couple of days. Meanwhile, other WTHR staffers waited outside to videotape the sheriff driving away in his car.
Overall, we ended up deploying more than 20 staff members to the undercover effort. We spent countless hours following and observing Cottey as he went through his daily routine - and that often included bars. At times, the work was frustrating as we lost track of his whereabouts in heavy traffic or on the interstates. But in the end, the work yielded results. We were able to air a story that contrasted Cottey's public image as a crusader against drinking and driving (he serves on the governor's Council for Impaired and Dangerous Driving), with his own habit of crossing the line when it came to his department's rules on drinking.
Higher standards
Over the three-week period that we followed Cottey (not including weekends), we witnessed him drinking and then driving on repeated occasions during both the daytime and early evening. We learned his favorite spots and favorite drinks - like vodka and grapefruit juice. And when he was done, he got behind the wheel of his county-- owned car most every time. On or off duty, it was a clear violation of the department's rules.
Was the sheriff legally drunk? We couldn't - and didn't - say. What we could say is that sheriff's department employees are held to a higher standard than state law on driving while intoxicated. First, they're forbidden to consume alcohol while on duty. Second, the rules say no member shall operate "a county-owned vehicle, whether on duty or off duty, while under the influence of intoxicating beverages." And third, just the odor of alcohol on the breath of a department member may be considered "presumptive evidence of intoxication and the member may be subject to immediate suspension of his police powers."
Under those rules, Cottey had repeatedly committed the same offense he has punished others for. In one case, the department even conducted a surveillance operation on one of its own deputies after receiving a tip that he was drinking off duty and then driving his patrol car. He and others inside the department were charged with violating the rules despite never being made to take breath tests.
So what did the sheriff have to say about it all? We'd love to know, but he refused to talk to us and dodged our impromptu attempts to speak with him. He did tell The Indianapolis Star that he doesn't drink while on duty and has never driven drunk. But later, his attorney faxed WTHR a letter suggesting that as an elected official, Cottey is not subject to disciplinary rules that apply to merit employees.
That reaction outraged viewers who saw our piece. We received as many e-mails and phone calls about this story as we have on any other that we've done. Naturally, some were supportive of the sheriff. Many of them, however, harshly criticized his apparent double standard.
Story fallout
The story generated numerous follow-ups and was picked up by in media outlets around the state. But it also prompted the sheriff to prohibit his deputies from speaking to anyone at our station about any department-related story. This obviously played havoc with our coverage of routine crime stories, and it lasted for more than a year.
There was other retribution as well, including surveillance by the sheriff's department on several of our employees. Several months after the series ran, the department arrested our investigative reporter on bogus DUI charges. The case smelled from the outset. For this single arrest, the department required at least eight deputies on the scene and a $90,000 drug surveillance van. The deputies included an off-duty breath analysis operator brought in from across town (another operator just around the comer was inexplicably waved off), who registered our reporter's blood alcohol level at exactly the legal limit. Months later, the department quietly signaled that it wanted the case to go away, and the charges were dismissed as part of an unusual diversionary agreement with no admission of guilt.
The lesson: If you want to do a story like this, keep your guard up. Anytime you investigate a prominent law enforcement official, particularly with undercover tactics, expect to find yourself under scrutiny as well. In the end, we chalk up the repercussions against the station to an occupational hazard, And the story was worth it - it was an interesting, important piece about a powerful politician whose actions didn't match his words. And it wouldn't have been possible without the undercover effort.
Gerry Lanosga and Kathleen Johnston are investigative producers at WTHR, the NBC affiliate in Indianapolis.
Copyright Investigative Reporters & Editors May/Jun 2002
