**FOIA documents reveal a police lieutenant’s racial reprimand, the chief’s “close personal relationship” with the officer he hired, and a pattern of insular accountability.**
—
Personnel records obtained through FOIA requests from the Batesville Police Department reveal a department where personal relationships drive hiring decisions, racial misconduct receives minimal consequences, and cases involving politically connected individuals are quietly transferred elsewhere.
## The Racial Reprimand: Three Days Off
On May 17, 2016, a civilian named Arthur Montgomery was in Police Chief Alan Cockrill’s office having a conversation. Lt. John Scarbrough entered the doorway at the Chief’s request. According to the official reprimand letter signed by Chief Cockrill:
“Officer’s at the other end of the building hollered at Lt. Scarbrough who at that time made a statement that Mr. Montgomery found offensive.”
The letter identifies it as a “racial statement.” Montgomery “wanted action taken.”
The consequences for a police lieutenant making a racial statement in front of a civilian, in the Chief’s own office:
1. A written reprimand to remain in his file for **six months**, after which it would be removed “if no further action is taken”
2. **Three days off** (May 18-20, 2016)
3. A general reminder to all officers about racial statements in the workplace
Mayor Rick Elumbaugh met with both Scarbrough and Cockrill about the incident. Montgomery was contacted “at the end of the same day and informed of the action to be taken.”
The reprimand letter does not specify what Scarbrough actually said. It does not indicate whether any independent investigation was conducted. The discipline was handled entirely within the department by the Chief who, as other documents reveal, had a deeply personal relationship with Scarbrough.
## “Close Personal Working and Outside of Work Relationship”
When Scarbrough was hired by the Batesville Police Department as a Lieutenant in February 2015, a background investigation was conducted. The investigator, Officer Kyle Tate Williford, wrote:
“Chief Alan Cockrill advised that he has had a **close personal working and outside of work relationship** with Scarbrough since he began his career at the Sheriff’s Office.”
Cockrill and Scarbrough had both previously served at the Independence County Sheriff’s Office. In fact, Lt. Brenda Bittle (then a criminal investigator at the Sheriff’s Office) conducted Scarbrough’s initial background check for the Sheriff’s Department back in January 2001.
Based on his personal relationship with the applicant, Williford concluded: “it is my opinion that he would be suitable for a position as a law enforcement officer with the City of Batesville.”
The initial employment report (CLEST Form F-1) confirms that the interview board consisted of “Chief Alan Cockrill” alone, with no others listed.
This creates an obvious question: when Scarbrough made a racial statement in the Chief’s office just over a year later, was the Chief positioned to hold his close personal friend accountable? The three-day suspension and a temporary reprimand (removed from the file after six months) suggest the answer.
## Scarbrough’s Career and Training Record
To be clear about who we are discussing: John David Scarbrough is not a marginal figure in local law enforcement. His CLEST (Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training) professional history shows:
– Over 1,168 hours of documented training, including an Advanced CLEST Certificate
– Service at the Independence County Sheriff’s Office from 2001 to 2015, with multiple deputy appointment letters under Sheriffs Dan Johnson, Keith Bowers, and Steve Jeffery
– Military service with an honorable discharge
– Hired as Lieutenant at BPD in February 2015
His training record includes, notably, “2019 Racial Profiling” training (completed October 2019), three years after his racial reprimand.
## The “Conflict of Interest” Transfer
The accountability questions at BPD extend beyond internal discipline. As reported separately by IndependenceWatch (see: “City Alderman Fred Krug: A Pattern of Misconduct”), when City Alderman Fred Krug became the primary suspect in a 2019 criminal mischief case, the Batesville Police Department transferred the case to the Independence County Sheriff’s Office, citing a “conflict of interest.”
The police report (Incident #19-00216) does not explain the nature of the conflict. But the implication is straightforward: city police determined they could not objectively investigate a sitting city alderman. Whether the Sheriff’s Office ever resolved the case remains unknown.
This is not inherently improper. Recognizing a conflict and transferring a case is better than ignoring the conflict. But it raises a structural question: in a small city where the police chief hires personal friends as lieutenants, where a racial incident is handled with a temporary note in a file, and where cases involving elected officials cannot be investigated internally, who provides meaningful oversight?
## What the Records Show
The FOIA documents do not prove corruption. They reveal something more subtle and, in some ways, more concerning: a system where personal relationships and institutional loyalty appear to take priority over independent accountability.
– A police chief hires a close personal friend as his second-in-command
– That friend makes a racial statement in the chief’s own office
– The chief handles it internally with minimal consequences
– The reprimand is designed to disappear from the record after six months
– Cases involving politically connected individuals are transferred out rather than investigated
Each of these decisions may have a reasonable explanation in isolation. Together, they describe an institution that struggles to hold its own accountable.
## Outstanding Questions
1. **What did Lt. Scarbrough say?** The reprimand letter identifies a “racial statement” but never specifies the words used. The public has a right to know what a police lieutenant said that was offensive enough to warrant discipline.
2. **Was the reprimand removed?** The letter stated it would be removed after six months “if no further action is taken.” Was it?
3. **Who is Arthur Montgomery?** Was he offered any further recourse beyond being informed of the action taken?
4. **Has the hiring process changed?** When Chief Cockrill was the sole interviewer for his close personal friend’s hiring, was that consistent with department policy?
5. **What happened to the Krug case at the Sheriff’s Office?** When BPD transferred Incident #19-00216 due to “conflict of interest,” did the Sheriff’s Office investigate, and what was the outcome?
—
*Sources: Batesville Police Department reprimand letter from Chief Alan R. Cockrill to Lt. John Scarbrough, dated May 17, 2016; Background investigation report by Kyle Tate Williford, dated May 26, 2015; CLEST Form F-1 (Initial Employment Report) for John David Scarbrough, dated February 2015; CLEST Professional History Report for Scarbrough, John David (generated December 5, 2019); Batesville Police Department Incident Report #19-00216. All documents obtained via FOIA.*