Judge skeptical of subpoenas sought by Colby Turner in police-detail theft case

WORCESTER — A lawyer for Colby Turner, the city police officer facing charges he stole nearly $50,000 in detail pay, faced pointed questioning from a judge Friday regarding extensive requests to subpoena city documents for his defense.

“Do you have any facts to support that?” Worcester Superior Court Judge Karin Bell asked at one point during a hearing in which Turner’s lawyer suggested the department’s detail process is “basically full of nepotism.”

Turner’s lawyer, Hank Brennan, argued that grand jury minutes and other materials he has received related to the investigation suggest the city had an “archaic” paper-based system of assigning and tracking detail pay that made understanding the process impossible.

Brennan, whose client has argued he’s innocent and suggested he may have been framed, argued he can’t properly defend himself without a better understanding of the overtime system and its potential accountability pitfalls.

“It’s confusing, maybe on purpose,” said Brennan, who particularly focused on a “private details” system in which some police officers who acted as liaisons to certain businesses assigned details themselves rather than going through the department’s detail office.

Lawyer wants more paperwork

Brennan argued the charges against Turner can’t be fully understood without additional documents from the city and he requested Bell approve subpoenas for broad swaths of documentation including essentially all documentation on details for all officers during the 2021 to 2022 period for which Turner is charged.

Brennan also sought to subpoena, among other things, all documents relating to prior overtime issues in the department including a 2008 scandal that led to an attorney general probe but no criminal charges, and a more recent audit that preceded policy changes.

Brennan said he does not believe others accused of impropriety were immediately criminally charged — instead facing internal affairs probes — and suggested that could be evidence of discrimination against Turner, who is Black.

Graham Van Epps, a special prosecutor from the Middlesex District Attorney’s office handling the case, argued to Bell that Turner has not met the legal standard required to obtain subpoenas under court rules.

Van Epps, in court and in his filings, noted Turner has not filed any sworn affidavit regarding any of his claims and said his motions for subpoenas appear to be the kind of “fishing expedition” barred by court rules..

Van Epps said that, contrary to Turner’s claims, the evidence against him is quite specific. A lengthy investigative report, as well as grand jury minutes filed with the court under seal, he said, clearly support the charges against him.

According to Van Epps, Turner, from Oct. 2021 to July 2022, submitted more than 150 off-duty assignment slips fraudulently claiming to have worked details in the city.

Van Epps said the investigation showed Turner inserted false names and signatures of employees who were supposed to sign off at the business and in four instances totaling about $1,200, stole overtime pay by forging his supervisor’s signature. 

Accused of stealing $53K

Turner stole about $53,000 in total, Van Epps wrote in court documents. He said police officers who ran the “private detail” assignments confirmed Turner hadn’t been asked to cover the shifts for which he collected — testimony he said was “corroborated in some instances by video surveillance,” and that Turner’s fingerprints were on many of the fraudulent billing slips.

Van Epps also noted that Turner deposited the checks — which listed the details for which he was being paid — in his bank account.

“I don’t really believe this is quite as murky as Mr. Brennan is making it out to be,” Van Epps told Bell, adding he believes the defense’s theory of the case to be “fanciful.”

Bell, while taking the requests for subpoenas under advisement and pledging to review the impounded grand jury minutes, signaled skepticism at Turner’s request from the beginning.

Bell said throughout her questioning of Brennan that it did not appear Turner had met the bar needed to obtain subpoenas and agreed at times that the requests appeared to be “fishing” for information that would help the defense’s case.

The subpoena process Turner is seeking to use — called Rule 17 — is a separate process from the routine discovery process in which defendants are entitled to receive information from the government about its investigation.

The two sides also have disagreements on the scope of that process and are slated to continue to argue motions on it this spring.

Bell had not yet entered a ruling on the subpoena requests as of Monday morning.

Turner, who was placed on unpaid leave following his Aug. 2022 arrest, remains on unpaid leave, police confirmed Monday.

His certification as a police officer in Massachusetts was revoked by the state last year.

This article originally appeared on Telegram & Gazette: Worcester: Judge skeptical of subpoenas sought in police-detail theft case