The Missouri attorney general’s trial that could remove St. Louis Sheriff Alfred Montgomery came to a close on Tuesday, with more than 30 witnesses testified over the course of a week.
“This court was very concerned with the urgency of a matter of this sort,” said Circuit Judge Steven R. Ohmer, who said he would rule on the matter on another unspecified date. “Let this court focus on the issues that this court needs to focus on.”
Tuesday offered each side one last chance to lay the legal groundwork for their argument before Ohmer begins weighing his decision in the bench trial. Montgomery watched the proceedings wearing a light-blue-washed plaid suit and a red tie.
Assistant Attorney General Greg Goodwin argued that the sheriff’s conduct proved that he knowingly did not fulfill the duties of his office and should be immediately removed.
Goodwin referenced the sheriff’s alleged failure to transport detainees for medical care, taking former sheriff’s deputy Daryl Wilson’s gun, handcuffing then-acting jail director Tammy Ross and financial mismanagement.
The state cited case law and state statutes to bolster their arguments, including a Missouri law that states the sheriff can’t generally enforce criminal law. Goodwin also said Montgomery had yet to explain what if any statute he used justify his actions toward Ross and Wilson. The sheriff’s office has previously said the two were interfering with the office.
“That’s a job for the Metropolitan Police Department, not Alfred Montgomery,” said Goodwin about disarming Wilson.
The state also argued that Montgomery knowingly did not transport jail detainees. As of Monday, Goodwin said the sheriff’s office completed 86 medical transports and failed to complete 88 of them. Earlier in the trial, the state detailed an instance that required a detainee’s surgery to get postponed.
“He cannot blame his staff,” said Goodwin. “He can’t blame the CJC. He can’t blame anyone else. It's his job to carry out his duties, and he failed.”
David C. Mason, one of the sheriff’s attorneys, disagreed. He pointed to decades of St. Louis sheriffs asking the city for increased funding to be able to complete such transports.
“The sheriff's office would be happy to help if it's funded,” he said. “I don’t know why that's overlooked when it's so apparently obvious and written throughout the history of this city.”
The sheriff’s attorney further argued that hospital transport duties had not been clearly defined in state statute and that the attorney’s general office has used the removal petition, known as a quo warranto, as an intimidation tactic.
“Quo warranto motions can be abusive,” said Mason, later adding: “This is some sort of purely political ornament that should not be on this court’s bench and shouldn’t be the basis of some argument that a politician, that the mayor disagrees with, ought to be removed from office.”
Goodwin ended the state’s argument by saying Montgomery should be removed because he’s being held in federal custody. The Perry County, Illinois, jail warden testified Monday the sheriff has access to phones and text messages, which cost 10 cents a message.
The state argued that won’t work and the Missouri Supreme Court has removed an official for being absent less time than the sheriff has already missed.
“Being sheriff is not a remote position — its a full time, in-person job and Alfred Montgomery can’t do it from a jail cell in Illinois,” said Goodwin. “He has failed to devote his full time to his office. He simply can’t do it.”
Mason called on Ohmer to not let the federal government “usurp” his judicial power and allow “federal charades” to move forward.
“What they are basically saying to this court is that your authority has now been usurped by Magistrate [John] Bodenhausen,” he said. “Bodenhausen, has, I feel, helped [the state] out by yanking this man from his ability to do his job.”
The sheriff’s attorney said Montgomery still has access to communicate with staff.
“We can probably communicate with him better then when he’s in his office on the 8th floor,” said Mason, joking that it would be better than trying to reach someone on a resort vacation with bad internet access.
In another charge, the state said it was clear that then Sgt. Barbara Chavers transported the sheriff’s children “too many times to count.” Doing so, Goodwin said, was absolutely a benefit he received from the office and warranting removal.
“There are parents across the city, across the state, and across this country who would love someone to pick up their children in a government car and watch them,” the state’s attorney said. “That man used his office to obtain it.”
Mason, as expected, disagreed and said if such a strict standard was going to apply in relation to children being in the workplace then the attorney general should be required to send out a memo stating as such for all public employees.
“If you bring your kids into a public building, and you aren’t paying for the space or the time they’re in the building, we’re going to go after you for stealing,” the sheriff’s attorney said sarcastically, shaking off the attorney general’s argument. “Take your kid to work day is now illegal for all employees in the state of Missouri.”
Goodwin said Chavers’ actions are part of a cover-up by the sheriff’s office. He asked why she came back to the office after picking up Montgomery’s kids if she was off duty.
Throughout closing arguments, Montgomery’s attorneys maintained the state’s quo warranto petition’s reasons for wanting to oust the sheriff were greatly exaggerated and do not rise to the level of extreme misconduct required.
The state voluntarily dropped one of the petition’s counts, a nepotism charge, in August after the defense provided DNA evidence and birth certificates that proved the sheriff was not related to one of his staffers.
The courtroom has been packed throughout the trial with a mix of attorneys, including Assistant U.S. Attorney Christine Krug; attorney Joe Neill, who has also previously sued Montgomery; 14th Ward Alderman Rasheen Aldridge; city legislative staff; law students; Montgomery’s family; St. Louis NAACP President Adolphus Pruitt; perennial political candidate Carla “Coffee” Wright and community members who said they supported the jailed sheriff.
Justin Gelfand, another of the sheriff’s attorneys, told reporters the night before closing arguments that the removal effort was an attack against democracy.
“What a quo warranto ultimately does is it literally overturns the results of a free and fair election,” Gelfand said. “There's nothing that happened in this courtroom that we believe warrants that writ.”
The fate of Montgomery’s future in office now lies in Judge Ohmer’s hands.
