ADVERTISEMENT

Iowa City police officer, fired for alleged drunken crash, appeals termination

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,514
59,004
113
An Iowa City police officer was fired last month for allegedly driving drunk, crashing his vehicle and lying about the circumstances of the crash to the police department, according to city documents.

That officer, Terry Tack, 49, appealed his termination and is seeking reinstatement. In a notice of appeal filed by his attorney, Skylar J. Limkemann, Tack says his termination lacked proper cause and sufficient grounds, is unreasonable and inconsistent with due process, among other reasons.

The city’s civil service commission is scheduled to hear the case Wednesday and issue a decision on Tack’s employment status, possibly at a later date.

Tack was fired on Jan. 21 and he appealed his termination in documents filed with the city on Feb. 4. The police department and Police Chief Jody Matherly responded with a specification of charges on Feb. 6.

According to that specification and court documents, Tack drank “to the point of intoxication” while off duty at three bars during the afternoon and evening of Nov. 24, 2019, and drove home. Tack hit a utility pole around 10:05 p.m. at 510 E. Benton St., causing damage to the pole and approximately $7,000 worth of damage to his Toyota 4Runner, according to the reports.

Authorities said Tack fled the scene as neighbors exited their homes and did not leave contact information or contact the property owner about the damage.

The next day, again according to city documents, Tack contacted Iowa City police officer Ian Alke for help in writing up a crash report.



“I need your help,” Tack allegedly told Alke. “I hit something with my car.”

Iowa City Civil Service Commission document about Terry Tack
Authorities said Tack told Alke he did not hit anyone with his car, but struck a large rock adjacent to the roadway. He also told Alke he found a piece of his bumper near the crash location.

Authorities also said Tack met with Alke near 500 S. Governor Street. Despite the significant damage and parts missing to Tack’s vehicle, authorities said none of the missing parts were found near the rock on South Governor Street nor was there any “disturbance” to the leaves near the rock or the rock itself.

After completing the report, Alke submitted it and brought it to the attention of Lt. Kevin Heick, telling Heick he “considered the report ‘a big deal.’”

Heick then reviewed calls for service for Nov. 24, went to South Governor Street and then to Benton Street where he “found an abundance of wreck debris” consistent with Tack’s vehicle. Heick then reported the issue to Matherly, Capt. Bill Campbell and Lt. Zach Diersen.

Authorities said Diersen spoke on the phone with Tack, who said that he “had looked down, veered off the road and struck the rock on S. Governor,” the specification of charges states. The Iowa State Patrol was brought in to investigate the crash and ultimately charged him with striking fixtures upon a highway.

Tack pleaded guilty and was fined $65.

Authorities said in city documents that Tack admitted in an interview that he did not remember being at the third bar the night of Nov. 24, how he got home or what he hit with his vehicle. He said his memory loss was not the result of medication or any medical condition.

“He acknowledges he did not remember details of the evening because of the alcohol he consumed,” city documents state.



The city says Tack did not act with integrity when reporting details of the crash to Alke, Diersen and the state patrol. Johnson County Attorney Janet Lyness said Tack’s actions would affect his ability to be a credible witness if he remained a police officer, the city stated.

While Tack has not been charged with drunken driving, the police department’s internal affairs investigation determined Tack violated “numerous” department rules and regulations, as well as city personnel policies.

https://www.thegazette.com/subject/...ed-drunken-crash-appeals-termination-20200218
 
So...if the erstwhile officer had enough presence of mind to pick up all of the crash debris at the site of the actual crash AND then deposit the materials next to the alleged rock AND maybe scuffed up the leaves enough there...he might have succeeded in his boneheaded effort??

Uphold the termination...this guy is too stupid to be a cop.
 
Yes because no cops get charged :rolleyes:
Name some lately. Include some in Iowa city. The one thing I learned in law school was that there is no independence between the prosecuting attorney and law enforcement. Butt buddies forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinehawk
Name some lately. Include some in Iowa city. The one thing I learned in law school was that there is no independence between the prosecuting attorney and law enforcement. Butt buddies forever.
Well I can only assume your law school sucked and liked to make general statements that aren't completely true. Are some prosecuting attorney's and law enforcement buddies? Sure, but you act like they won't ever charge someone in law enforcement which isn't true.
 
Curious, were you a criminal law track student?
No but everyone in law school takes crim law and crim procedure. The guy who taught me actually became a federal judge in the Trump administration. He was wildly pro prosecution and viewed defendants, especially minorities, of being guilty even before trial; it was just a question of how guilty.
 
He’s been fined $70. What else do you think will happen? What could you charge him with retroactively in your experience?
I doubt anything else will happen unfortunately. If he lied to police he should have been charged with interference with official acts. It's tough to know what could have been charged without all of the details.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I doubt anything else will happen unfortunately. If he lied to police he should have been charged with interference with official acts. It's tough to know what could have been charged without all of the details.
What about the officer that snitched? Think he'll be ok?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UKGrad93
I doubt anything else will happen unfortunately. If he lied to police he should have been charged with interference with official acts. It's tough to know what could have been charged without all of the details.

Leaving the scene of an accident. Filing a false police report. Both should be enough to prove he doesn’t have the proper ethics to carry a badge and gun.
 
Leaving the scene of an accident. Filing a false police report. Both should be enough to prove he doesn’t have the proper ethics to carry a badge and gun.
If there wasn't a personal injury accident you have 72 hrs to report it which he did. Just lied about it when he did report it. Interference with official acts is for the filling false report.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT