Police policy/procedure in 1986

Police policy/procedure in 1986

Policy Procdedure October 2017-1

1. If Keith had ID on him, Leverette had no business speaking to neighbors or showing death photos of deceased. Because at that point ID was not in question—only Death Notification procedures remained. Why did he go to my neighbor’s house and show her a picture of Keith and identify Keith prior to notifying next of kin? Was this policy/procedure in1986?

2. Did MCMPD have a Victim’s Advocate Unit at the time of this incident? From what I understand VAU is supposed to go with a law enforcement officer to family for death notifications. Also, in researching other states and counties, police departments usually do not make death notifications—a sheriff office will do this. I would like to see the policy/procedure in 1986 for Death Notification however supposedly there is no copy of this manual anywhere in the county. 

3. If Beasley was on the scene, Leverette, as the initial / first officer on scene handed the scene over to Beasley. So, if Beasley showed up, any investigation of the body, the scene, etc., is the responsibility of Beasley and not Leverette. Beasley should have made the next of kin notification. Why did Leverette go around the neighbor, 711, Hechinger’s, and Keith’s job flashing around a death photo and letting non-family members know of Keith’s death when they had no need to know? Was this policy/procedure of the department?

4.From my understanding that photo of Keith Leverette was using to show everyone was physical evidence and should have been treated as such. Please show me in the Policy and Procedure manual where it was ok for Leverette to carry around evidence and show it to people. Was this policy/procedure

5. There were several violations of procedure, carelessness, lack of judgment on the part of Leverette: scene not taped off, no investigation done to confirm suicide vs. homicide, no autopsy/tox performed, next-of-kin not notified right away, several people notified before my mom, body hastily embalmed w/o ID or authorization of next-of-kin. This was proven in the notes received in 2014 where Beasley noted he called Collins funeral home at 10am and was told “the body was processed”. Was this policy/procedure in 1986? Why was this allowed and was there any disciplinary actions taken against Beasley or Leverette?

6. Why was Leverette doing the interview with my mother rather than Beasley? Was this policy/procedure?

7. During his time with my mom Leverette did not ask for a witness to comfort my mom. A witness is not necessary when interviewing someone. However, asking the grieving if there is someone they can call—PRIOR TO NOTIFICATION—that person would have been there to comfort my mom. This shows Leverette was not versed in interviewing a grieving person. And MCMPD should have known that & not allowed Leverette to do any of the actions he has taken after leaving the scene.

8. Whatever information my mom gave Leverette about Keith should NOT have been taken as fact since it was ONLY hearsay / guessing / opinion. Yes, she was his mother but mothers have bias just like everyone else and they are NOT the best person to ask when it comes to what their children did / did not do or what they were or were not into.
* In other words, everything my mom told Leverette should have been taken with a grain of salt and not as factual information used to determine whether it was a suicide or a homicide.

9. Where was Beasley? Why was Beasley not around and that no one required body identification prior to his body going to the funeral home? From my understanding the photo should not have stood as identification of body…. pictures lie, and from what I have read the grieving can see what is not there or not see what is there (ie: they can misidentify with pictures due to emotional state which is why identification of actual physical body is required….)



Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *