Malvern Police Square Off in District Court

Judge William Kraut did not render a verdict Wednesday in the civil case against Sgt. Lloyd Douglas, who is accused by fellow officers of misspending communal funds.

After listening to two hours of testimony from five Malvern police officers, including Sgt. Douglas, Kraut said the law gives him five days to consider the case and lamented the circumstances.

"It's tragic," Kraut said. "I'm sorry it came this far, for everyone."

At issue is $201.34 that Douglas spent near the end of his tenure as head of the Malvern Borough Police Joint Negotiating Committee, from 2002 to 2010. Officer Joseph Cordone, who took over as committee president in 2011, said his review of committee finances revealed three inappropriate expenditures:

• approx. $49, payment of a Turnpike Commission fine
• approx. $19, purchase of a badge wallet
• approx. $135, purchase of police "baseball cards"

Cordone testified that the payments violated the bylaws of the committee, which specify dollar amounts and types of expenditures that do not require a committee vote of approval, e.g. Fraternal Order of Police dues, collective bargaining and legal aid expenses, and gifts to retiring officers.

Each full-time officer except the chief contributes $50 per month to the fund, which has maintained a balance in excess of $10,000 in recent years. Cordone said he sent Douglas a letter in June and a second, certified letter in August requesting reimbursement for the three checks. He said he received no response and so filed the civil action on Sept. 6.

After Cordone's testimony, Candidus Dougherty, lawyer for the plaintiff, called three more of Douglas's subordinates to the stand.

Retired patrolman Andrew Woolfrey testified that he wrote the bylaws around 1994, when the committee was formed. Judge Kraut noted that the bylaws are for the "Malvern Borough Police Association," while the lawsuit was filed by the Joint Negotiating Committee. Woolfrey explained that the borough refused to recognize the "association," and the two names were interchangeable.

Officers John McNamee and Patrick Dougherty testified that they had not voted on or consented to the three expenditures in question.

During cross-examination from defense attorney Thomas Bergstrom, the officers said they had not ever voted on expenditures prior to December 2011.

"Nobody paid a damn bit of attention to the bylaws," Bergstrom said later.

McNamee testified that he was driving the police SUV with Douglas on a trip to Plymouth Meeting when the Turnpike Commission fine was incurred for nonpayment of a toll. He said that he had offered to pay the fine but never saw the ticket.

"Sergeant Douglas insisted he would take care of it," McNamee said.

When Bergstrom called Douglas to the stand, the sergeant left his chair at the defense table spinning in his hurry to defend himself. He admitted that the expenditures did not "fall between A, B, C, D or E"—the salient sections of the bylaws in front of him—but contended that his position as head of the Joint Negotiating Committee was informal.

"I didn't know what I was. I was handed a checkbook. I was handed a box, and in my spare time I looked through it. I don't know if I was a chief or a peon," Douglas said.

He contradicted McNamee's testimony, saying that the officer had seen the turnpike ticket.

"John came in with a photo of the license plate on the ticket. He said, 'I hope the chief doesn't find out,'" Douglas said. "I could care less about the ticket. I paid it."

Regarding the new badge wallet, Douglas said a replacement was necessary after 15 years of wear and tear on his previous one.

"People would actually laugh. One time, my badge fell out," Douglas said. "Nobody else needed one. I would have replaced theirs, too."

Both parties mentioned that an appreciative borough resident had made a standing offer to purchase the "baseball" trading cards, which police departments commonly give out to children. The resident, a retired Marine, had bought such cards in the past, but was not involved in the disputed purchase.

Douglas said he'd asked McNamee to take his photograph for a new set of cards and order them. McNamee had earlier testified that Douglas had approved the photo proof and he'd placed the order. Douglas testified that he'd been unhappy with the proof and requested a new photo. He said he never received the cards, but paid for them after receiving a harshly worded invoice from the vendor, Choice Marketing.

Judge Kraut, who was assigned the case after Judge Darlington recused himself, asked Douglas about the bigger picture.

"Has this caused a fracture in the department?" Kraut asked.

"That's an understatement," Douglas said. "In 26 years [with the department], this is one of the most mind-boggling days I've been through. Mind-boggling months."

After closing arguments, the judge wondered aloud why the committee didn't seek reimbursement from the officer who had agreed to pay the ticket and the resident who had agreed to pay for the trading cards.

"When you whittle this down, this case is about $18.49 for a badge holder," Kraut said.