151
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
2 EASTERN DIVISION
3 ERNEST T. BROWN, et al., )
)
4 Plaintiffs, )
) No. 95 C 1890
5 v. ) Chicago, Illinois
) November 19, 1997
6 CITY OF CHICAGO, ) 10:00 a.m.
)
7 Defendant. )
8 VOLUME 2
9 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS - TRIAL
10 BEFORE THE HONORABLE ROBERT W. GETTLEMAN
11 APPEARANCES:
12 For the Plaintiffs: KENNETH N. FLAXMAN, P.C.
122 South Michigan Avenue
13 Chicago, Illinois 60603-6107
BY: MR. KENNETH N. FLAXMAN
14
FUTTERMAN & HOWARD, CHTD
15 122 South Michigan Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60603
16 BY: MR. CRAIG FUTTERMAN
17
For the Defendant: MAYER, BROWN & PLATT
18 190 South LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
19 BY: MR. JAMES HOLZHAUER
MR. JEFFREY S. PIELL
20 MS. ANGELA K. DORN
MR. ANDREW NICELY
21
22 Official Court Reporter: JENNIFER S. COSTALES, CSR, RMR
219 South Dearborn Street
23 Room 1744-A
Chicago, Illinois 60604
24 (312) 427-5351
25
152
Thompson - direct
1 (Proceedings heard in open court.)
2 THE CLERK: 95 C 1890, Ernest T. Brown versus City
3 of Chicago, on trial.
4 THE COURT: Ms. Thompson, would you please resume
5 the stand. You are still under oath.
6 Counsel?
7 DIANE THOMPSON, PLAINTIFFS' WITNESS, PREVIOUSLY DULY SWORN
8 DIRECT EXAMINATION
9 RESUMED
10 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
11 Q. Yesterday, Sergeant Thompson, I believe you were talking
12 about your career with the Chicago Police Department, and we
13 were going through the history of your career, and we had
14 gotten to about 1988, I believe.
15 A. Yes, sir.
16 Q. And you'd just described your experience as an
17 administrative assistant for two commanding officers.
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. So now we're in 1988, and can you tell me what was your
20 next position in the department?
21 A. I took an exam, was promoted to the rank of sergeant
22 December 1st, 1988.
23 Q. Where were you first assigned?
24 A. I was assigned to the youth division.
25 Q. What were your responsibilities as a sergeant in the
153
Thompson - direct
1 youth division?
2 A. My responsibilities included the supervision of
3 investigating officers that did follow-up investigations
4 relevant to child abuse, neglect, dependency, curfews,
5 missings. I also had the opportunity to work as a watch
6 commander in that capacity. That meant supervising the other
7 staffs who were also sergeants.
8 Q. Is a watch commander a position that's normally held by a
9 lieutenant?
10 A. Not in the youth division. Patrol, yes. In the youth
11 division it's not.
12 Q. Are there similarities between what a watch commander
13 does in the youth division and what a watch commander does in
14 a district?
15 A. To some extent, yes, there are some similarities.
16 Q. How are they different?
17 A. They're different in that the watch commander in patrol
18 is responsible for the desk responsibilities in regards to
19 prisoners, in regards to the lockup. In the youth division,
20 the watch commander does not have the same responsibilities.
21 I'm sorry.
22 Q. Go ahead.
23 A. They are similar in that when an arrest is made the watch
24 commander in the youth division has to review the arrest
25 report, make certain that the charges are appropriate for the
154
Thompson - direct
1 crime that's been committed.
2 Watch commander in the youth division is responsible
3 also for reviewing the case report to make sure all the
4 elements are there. The watch commander in the youth division
5 is also responsible for the staffing in regards to deportment
6 of officers for investigation purposes, similar to that in
7 patrol.
8 Q. Are there any other significant differences between a
9 watch commander in youth and watch commander in patrol?
10 A. Significant, no, sir.
11 Q. How long were you in that position?
12 A. Until 1989.
13 Q. And where were you assigned in '89?
14 A. I was detailed to the 6th District in patrol.
15 Q. And what -- in patrol what was your assignment? I'm
16 sorry, in the 6th District.
17 A. I was field supervising sergeant in the 6th District.
18 Q. What does a field supervising sergeant do?
19 A. A field supervising sergeant has really four
20 responsibilities: one is personnel management, another is
21 administration, another is patrol activity, and another one is
22 discipline, I believe. That's four.
23 Q. And as the field supervising sergeant were you the
24 supervisor in the field?
25 A. Yes, that's correct.
155
Thompson - direct
1 Q. And then throughout the 6th District?
2 A. The 6th District.
3 Q. How long were you detailed in that position?
4 A. I was detailed there for a year.
5 Q. So that takes us to somewhere in '90?
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. And what's your next assignment?
8 A. In '90 I was -- the detail was cancelled and I was
9 returned to the youth division Area 1. That's the south side
10 area.
11 Q. Were you also -- did you also have time when you were
12 assigned back to Area 1, the south side, to work as a watch
13 commander?
14 A. Yes, I was watch commander, and also in the capacity of
15 an area commanding officer. That spot in the youth division
16 is held by a lieutenant.
17 Q. How long were you in Area 1 in those positions?
18 A. In Area 1, in 1980 -- 1990, either one or two years.
19 Q. What did you do when you left Area 1?
20 A. I had several assignments. They varied, because there
21 was a new commander in the youth division, so they varied. I
22 was considered to be a troubleshooter in the division. If
23 there was a problem in school patrol with staffing, whatever
24 the problems were, they would send me to school patrol.
25 Three months later I was in juvenile court
156
Thompson - direct
1 addressing some issues there, in regards to juvenile laws, in
2 regards to juvenile proposals.
3 I was also assigned briefly to the academy to assist
4 with developing exams for youth officers, those persons who
5 would be taking exams to be promoted to the rank of youth
6 officer.
7 What else did I do? I think that was about it in
8 Area 1.
9 Q. During that time did you spend any time acting as either
10 a watch commander or a field supervisor?
11 A. In Area 1, yes, sir, I did.
12 Q. Was that during the entire time?
13 A. Back and forth, that's correct, yes, sir.
14 Q. Now, that took us, I believe -- I'm sorry. That was from
15 '90 to about '92 did you just describe, or am I --
16 A. '91.
17 Q. Go ahead.
18 A. '91. And in '91, I went before what's called an academic
19 selection board, and applied for admission to Northwestern
20 University. That's the police administration training program
21 for sergeants and lieutenants. And it's a nine-month training
22 program in management, and I was accepted for that particular
23 program.
24 Q. Did you obtain a certificate from that program?
25 A. I obtained graduation -- graduating was called -- with an
157
Thompson - direct
1 advanced diploma. You participated in ceremonies of
2 Northwestern's graduation, the regular one in June.
3 Q. Were you also working during that time?
4 A. No, sir. That is, my job from 8:00 to 4:00 was to be a
5 student. That's a program where there are 21 persons from
6 around the world, lieutenants and sergeants, who are accepted
7 for the program, and we're there to become better managers.
8 Q. When did you graduate from that program?
9 A. In 1992.
10 Q. Okay. And then from '92 after completing that program,
11 where were you assigned next?
12 A. I was assigned to Area 4.
13 Q. And what was your position in Area 4?
14 A. Field supervisor for youth officers, and again acting as
15 a watch commander. I also worked in the meantime as a
16 supervising SIU. I forgot that.
17 Q. I'm sorry.
18 A. Prior to going to Northwestern, I was also assigned
19 briefly as a troubleshooter in special investigations unit. I
20 had been a youth officer there years before that, and asked to
21 go back to that position as a supervisor.
22 Q. That was just before attending Northwestern?
23 A. Going to Northwestern, that's correct.
24 Q. Now, in Area 4, I believe you just said --
25 A. Yes, sir.
158
Thompson - direct
1 Q. -- how long were you in Area 4 after graduating from
2 Northwestern?
3 A. Approximately four years. I'm sorry. '92 to about '96.
4 Q. And you were in a supervisory capacity throughout that
5 time period?
6 A. Yes, that's correct.
7 Q. And in '96 where were you assigned?
8 A. To Area 1. Again.
9 Q. And in Area 1 what was your role there?
10 A. Again as a watch commander and a supervising sergeant.
11 Q. And are you still in Area 1?
12 A. No. I'm currently in the 5th District.
13 Q. When did you transfer?
14 A. February 1997. February of 1997.
15 Q. And I think, I believe you already described your current
16 duties in the 5th District.
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 Q. So based on your experience and observations over these
19 20 plus years on the job, do you feel that you're familiar
20 with what Chicago police lieutenants do?
21 A. Yes, sir.
22 Q. And how are you so familiar? What made you familiar with
23 what Chicago police lieutenants do?
24 A. Based on my assignments, I've had the opportunity to work
25 in the capacity as a lieutenant in the youth division. I
159
Thompson - direct
1 worked very close with the lieutenants that I'm assigned to
2 currently in patrol.
3 An example is when there was a hazardous material
4 spill on the south side of Chicago, I was asked to do the
5 coordination for all of that for the lieutenant on the scene.
6 Q. Now, did you take the lieutenants' promotional exam in
7 1994?
8 A. Yes, sir, I did.
9 Q. Did you prepare for that test?
10 A. Yes, sir, I did.
11 Q. When did you start preparing for that exam?
12 A. Approximately a year prior to the exam itself.
13 Q. About 1993?
14 A. Yes, sir.
15 Q. And how did you prepare? What did you do to prepare?
16 A. Took all of my current orders, notices, and made sure
17 that they were all current, obtained all the communications,
18 COS messages that might have changed and updated those
19 situations.
20 Q. What are COS messages?
21 A. Out communications. What it is is sometimes there is a
22 general order, and the change comes from research and
23 development that something is being changed by that order. We
24 have all the updated orders.
25 THE COURT: Slow down just a little bit.
160
Thompson - direct
1 THE WITNESS: That was the first thing I did, was
2 try and compare all of the data. Then I began to spend two
3 hours to four hours daily approximately six days a week in
4 reviewing the material.
5 Looked over some of the old exams that had been
6 given by the police department, signed up for some courses
7 also in regards to that; joined approximately four study
8 groups in preparation for the exam.
9 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
10 Q. You said you signed up for some courses as well?
11 A. Yes, that is correct.
12 Q. What courses did you enroll in to help prepare you for
13 the exam?
14 A. One of the ones -- there were two I actually paid for and
15 enrolled in. One was called the Conley Group, C-O-N-L-E-Y,
16 which dealt with the in-basket, and the second one was a
17 partnership between the FOP and the Bernstein and Associates
18 group, which provided training for the in-basket also.
19 Those are the two I paid for. The other groups
20 were, of course, free and provided to all officers.
21 I also reviewed a tape that was provided by the
22 department in helping to prepare for the exam. That was
23 offered in the district level itself.
24 Q. You said you also participated in study groups.
25 A. Yes, that's correct.
161
Thompson - direct
1 Q. Can you describe what you did in the study groups?
2 A. In the study groups, one met Thursday evenings at
3 University of Illinois, and at that group you were assigned a
4 general order to review. You developed questions from the
5 order itself. You forward those questions to the coordinating
6 personnel of that particular study group. They then develop
7 an exam.
8 So each Thursday you were given an exam of all the
9 notices you supplied to them for coordination. So that was
10 each Thursday where a group got together, over 102 officers
11 came together in the U of I and studied together. After the
12 exam was administered it was scored, then you would discuss
13 any questions you would have about the questions themselves.
14 Q. Did you believe you studied hard for the exam?
15 A. Exceptionally hard, sir.
16 Q. And you believe you studied appropriately for the exam?
17 A. Yes, sir. I was in study groups on Thursdays, Saturdays
18 and Sundays.
19 Q. Now, the test itself, the lieutenants promotional exam
20 itself had three parts; is that right?
21 A. That is correct.
22 Q. The oral part, the written part, and the in-basket part?
23 A. That is correct.
24 Q. I'd like to ask you to focus really on the in-basket
25 part.
162
Thompson - direct
1 MR. FUTTERMAN: May I approach the witness?
2 THE COURT: You may.
3 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
4 Q. I'd like to show you what's been marked Defendant's
5 Exhibit 15, which I believe has been admitted into evidence as
6 one of the stipulated exhibits.
7 Sergeant Thompson, can you tell us what Defendant's
8 Exhibit 15 is?
9 A. It is a copy of the in-basket that was administered by
10 the Chicago Police Department for the lieutenants in-basket
11 simulation.
12 Q. Is that the in-basket portion of the test that you took
13 in 1994?
14 A. I believe it is, sir, yes.
15 Q. Generally, can you describe to the Court what the
16 in-basket test generally required you to do?
17 A. There's a compilation of approximately maybe a hundred
18 sheets of paper, and you're required to familiarize yourself
19 with the information in the documents themselves, and then go
20 back and answer the questions, 60 questions in reference to
21 the documents that are provided in the stack of sheets here.
22 Q. Those 60 questions, were they open-ended questions or
23 multiple choice questions?
24 A. Multiple choice questions.
25 Q. And were you given a specific amount of time in which you
163
Thompson - direct
1 could answer those multiple choice questions?
2 A. Yes, we were.
3 Q. Do you remember how much time you were given?
4 A. I believe it was an hour and a half to answer the 60
5 questions.
6 THE COURT: How long to read the papers?
7 THE WITNESS: It might have been two hours, an hour
8 and a half or two. I don't recall the exact time.
9 THE COURT: Can you direct me to this exhibit,
10 Counsel, where the timing is set forth?
11 MR. FUTTERMAN: Sure.
12 THE COURT: I'm looking at page 3, which is Bates
13 8429. It says an hour and a half to complete the test. I
14 don't know whether that includes reading the --
15 THE WITNESS: No, sir. It does not.
16 MR. FUTTERMAN: Page 2, they're given two and a half
17 hours.
18 THE WITNESS: To review.
19 MR. FLAXMAN: He doesn't have the page.
20 MR. FUTTERMAN: Your Honor, that's on page Bates
21 stamp 8452.
22 THE COURT: Okay.
23 MR. FUTTERMAN: Thank you.
24 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
25 Q. Sergeant Thompson, in your experience, was this in-basket
164
Thompson - direct
1 exercise representative of what Chicago police lieutenants
2 actually do on the job?
3 A. No, sir, not at all.
4 Q. In your 20 plus years of experience on the job, have you
5 ever known a Chicago police lieutenant to have to review and
6 organize over a hundred pages of written materials, and then
7 answer multiple choice questions in a time frame?
8 A. No, sir.
9 Q. In all of your experience as a police officer, have you
10 ever seen a Chicago police lieutenant obtain his or her work
11 through an in-basket?
12 A. No, sir.
13 Q. How do Chicago police lieutenants receive their work?
14 A. Through the commanding officers book, which is a ledger
15 that has information from the DC, district commander of the
16 district, and that information is put in the book whenever it
17 comes in. It's available to each watch commander, each
18 lieutenant.
19 Q. What sort of information does the -- is it called a CO
20 book?
21 A. CO book. That's correct.
22 Q. What information does the CO book contain?
23 A. It contains information about staffing, it contains
24 information about details, it contains information about crime
25 situations in the district, reports that are due, data by
165
Thompson - direct
1 director of patrol. It's all in the CO book.
2 THE COURT: You're going very, very fast.
3 THE WITNESS: I'll slow down some more, then.
4 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
5 Q. What specifically are Chicago police lieutenants required
6 to do with the CO book? What are their responsibilities
7 regarding the CO book?
8 A. They're responsible to review it daily, they're
9 responsible for knowing the information in the CO book,
10 they're responsible for making the information available to
11 the sergeants as well as the line officers.
12 Q. Do they have to organize the materials that are in the CO
13 book?
14 A. No, sir. The materials are organized by the district
15 commander's office as well as the watch secretary. A watch
16 secretary works in the desk area, and prior to roll call that
17 person would have come in and sorted out information in
18 regards to what has been put into the CO book.
19 The watch commander/lieutenant is given a list each
20 day of who is going to be working their beat cars, their beat
21 assignments, their foot patrol assignments. That's done by
22 the watch secretary.
23 Q. So the Chicago Police Department is a paramilitary
24 organization, is it not?
25 A. That is correct.
166
Thompson - direct
1 Q. So what you're saying is those decisions and those
2 organizational decisions are made first before the lieutenant
3 gets a copy of the CO book; is that right?
4 A. That is correct.
5 Q. And the lieutenant's role in the chain of command is to
6 be sure that what's in the CO book is enforced?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. Within his or her district?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. PIELL: Your Honor, objection. We'll let the
11 last few questions go by, but we'll object to the leading
12 nature of these questions.
13 THE COURT: Try not to lead. Try not to lead,
14 Counsel.
15 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
16 Q. How do field supervisors get their work, lieutenants,
17 when they're playing the role of field supervisor?
18 A. From the watch commander and from the CO book also.
19 Q. Are they given a hundred pages of written materials and
20 asked to organize them?
21 A. No, sir.
22 Q. Now, in addition to the fact that a lieutenant would not
23 do the type of work required by the in-basket test, can you
24 give the Court any other examples of how the in-basket test is
25 not representative of what Chicago police lieutenants actually
167
Thompson - direct
1 do?
2 A. It includes information on scheduling, it includes
3 information about who should work with whom. It would include
4 information about crossing guards, it includes information in
5 regards to -- in regards to furloughs.
6 Those are the basic ones that I can recall that are
7 different than what the lieutenants in our department are
8 required to have the responsibilities for doing.
9 Q. Let's talk first about scheduling. Now, did the test
10 require you to arrange schedules, or time due slips, or
11 anything of that nature?
12 A. Scheduling, yes, it did. Several questions, especially
13 the last, maybe the last ten required scheduling information.
14 Q. Now, do Chicago police lieutenants plan or create
15 schedules?
16 A. No, sir.
17 Q. Do lieutenants --
18 A. The requirements --
19 Q. I'm sorry.
20 A. The requirements are done by the district commander in
21 regard to staffing requirements, how many sergeants are to be
22 working, how many people are supposed to be assigned to beats,
23 rapid response cars. That comes from the area deputy chief
24 down to the district commander, and then to the various
25 watches as to staffing and manpower.
168
Thompson - direct
1 The watch secretary has the responsibilities each
2 day to come in and make sure that those assignments are
3 fulfilled. They're actually done the day before. Today's
4 schedule -- today is Wednesday, the schedule is prepared for
5 tomorrow's date by the watch secretary.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 At the district level is it then the watch secretary
8 who has that primary responsibility?
9 A. Of filling out that form, yes, sir.
10 Q. What if anything is the lieutenant's role with regard to
11 scheduling?
12 A. The lieutenant doesn't have a role in regards to
13 scheduling. The watch commander approves the assignments done
14 by the watch secretary, and then they're posted for review as
15 to the assignments by the various officers and supervisors.
16 Q. You also mentioned something about a crossing guard plan
17 that was on the test.
18 A. Yes. The crossing guards are supervised by a crossing
19 guard liaison, who is often times a civilian, not a sworn
20 member whatsoever.
21 And by department policy of Chicago, the lieutenant
22 and all supervisors have the responsibilities of ensuring that
23 crossing guards are properly uniformed, that they're doing
24 their duty and they cover their post.
25 But as far as direct supervision, that is done by
169
Thompson - direct
1 liaison for the crossing guards. Anything else as to the
2 crossing guards is dealt with between the district commander
3 and the liaison or the coordinator for the crossing guards.
4 Q. So lieutenants do not have any role then in developing a
5 crossing guard plan, do they?
6 A. No, sir. They only do inspectional kinds of activities
7 of crossing guards, of uniforms.
8 Q. As part of the test were you also required to review
9 another lieutenant's notes?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Is that something that a Chicago police lieutenant would
12 ever do?
13 A. No, sir. That terminology of notes is very unfamiliar to
14 me. We only use what's called to-from subject reports.
15 Throughout the in-basket exam itself, there was a reference to
16 reviewing someone's notes, reviewing somebody's notes, here
17 are my notes about that.
18 Q. Slow down just a little bit.
19 A. So there was no reference in our department of anyone
20 having notes. We do actual reports, or we do actual forms.
21 We do not do notes.
22 Q. In your 20 plus years of experience have you ever seen a
23 lieutenant's notes?
24 A. No, sir.
25 Q. I'd like to direct your attention back to the test
170
Thompson - direct
1 itself, Defendant's Exhibit No. 15 that you have in front of
2 you. I'd like you to turn to question No. 24.
3 THE COURT: Give me a page number.
4 MR. FUTTERMAN: Which is on page 11. Which is Bates
5 number 8437, your Honor.
6 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
7 Q. Sergeant, have you found question No. 24?
8 A. Yes, sir.
9 Q. And D is indicated to be the correct answer; is that
10 right?
11 A. That is correct.
12 Q. Can you explain the type of work that was required of you
13 -- that would be required of you to answer that question
14 correctly on the test?
15 A. I would have had to have gone to locate Lieutenant
16 Joseph's notes, and the statement in regards to the CR
17 investigation of another sergeant. And the notes, once again,
18 would have been an item or an article that is not used by the
19 Chicago Police Department.
20 Q. I'd like you -- I'm sorry.
21 THE COURT: Are those notes in here?
22 MR. FUTTERMAN: Yes. There are many notes.
23 THE COURT: Well, the ones referred to in question
24 24.
25 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
171
Thompson - direct
1 Q. Sergeant, can you find an example in the written
2 materials of the notes that you're speaking of?
3 A. I'd have to sort through the whole stack of pages here to
4 locate the notes.
5 MR. PIELL: Counsel, you might want to look at 8466
6 or 8475.
7 BY THE WITNESS:
8 A. On page 8497 there are some notes, Roberta Joseph's.
9 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
10 Q. 8497?
11 A. That's one of them, yes.
12 THE COURT: 8497?
13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
14 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
15 Q. Would Chicago police lieutenants in practice have to do
16 the things required of you to answer question No. 24
17 correctly?
18 A. No, sir. I would not have to find someone's notes in
19 regards to this.
20 Q. I'd like you now to review -- let me turn back. Question
21 No. 27 -- I'll find the page in a moment -- which is 8438.
22 A. 27?
23 Q. Yes.
24 A. I have that.
25 Q. Have you reviewed it? What would you need to do to
172
Thompson - direct
1 answer that question correctly?
2 A. I would have had to go through the notes, have sorted
3 them out to determine which of the lieutenants would have had
4 the assignment for the investigation or the CR number; would
5 have had to establish that there was a relationship between
6 Sergeant Carson or Lieutenant Epsy or Lieutenant Watkins;
7 would have then also go and find in the notes the personnel
8 assignment to find out which of the lieutenants Sergeant
9 Carson was assigned to and being supervised by.
10 Q. Is this something that a Chicago police lieutenant would
11 have to do in practice on the job?
12 A. No, sir.
13 Q. Why not?
14 A. Because I would have had, as a lieutenant, the
15 information provided to me on the watch assignment forms, who
16 was assigned to whom.
17 Q. And would you generally know the people on your watch?
18 A. Yes, sir.
19 Q. So you wouldn't have to look it up in the papers?
20 A. Not through a stack of forms like this, no, sir.
21 Q. I'd like you now to review question 28, which is on the
22 same page, 8438.
23 A. Yes, sir.
24 Q. What would you have to do to answer that question
25 correctly?
173
Thompson - direct
1 A. I would have had to go through the stacks again and then
2 determine which of the sergeant's officer -- if there was
3 going to be counseling of an officer, that would have been
4 assigned to the one of three sergeants that's listed. I would
5 have to go and establish the fact from the personnel roster
6 who was Officer Simmons assigned to, number one, and number
7 two, that there was no relationship between the two that would
8 compromise the counseling or investigation of this officer.
9 Q. Now, would a Chicago police lieutenant on the job have to
10 go through those sorts of papers to solve this problem?
11 A. No, sir.
12 Q. What would a Chicago police lieutenant have to do?
13 A. Would have had that information available through the
14 watch assignment.
15 Q. How about question No. 32, if you can take a look at
16 that, which is on page 8440.
17 A. 32?
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. And your question is?
20 Q. My question, I'm sorry: What would you need to do to
21 answer that question correctly?
22 A. Well, the correct answer with this particular one is in
23 regards to the coverage at school crossings when crossing
24 guards are unavailable. Again, there is a crossing guard
25 liaison or coordinator who would have that responsibility.
174
Thompson - direct
1 He or she would get on the police radio, notify the
2 dispatcher, I need a car to cover that particular crossing.
3 The sergeant in that instance, if he or she passed that
4 location, would ensure that the sergeant showed up at that
5 location to cross the children. But as far as the assignment
6 and plan of personnel coverage, that would not have been done
7 by a sergeant.
8 Q. Would that have been done by a lieutenant?
9 A. No, sir.
10 Q. One more question, just as an example.
11 If you could turn to question No. 47, which is Bates
12 No. 8445.
13 After you review that question, can you please tell
14 the Court what you'd have to do to answer that question
15 correctly on the test.
16 A. Once again, to locate Lieutenant Joseph's notes; would
17 have had to review all of the officers requested time to be
18 off for that day, look at the assignments for details from the
19 district commander's office in regards to this day, and decide
20 which day is better for Sergeant Woodward to be off in
21 December of '84.
22 Q. Are these the sort of things Chicago police lieutenants
23 do on the job?
24 A. No, sir. When a request for time due is submitted, it's
25 submitted to the watch commander's office, put into a file,
175
Thompson - direct
1 then on the day or two before the assignment is to be given,
2 time to be given, the watch secretary again pulls the slips,
3 look at the manpower coverage, and then see if that person can
4 be off.
5 Q. So again, it's something that's a primary responsibility
6 of somebody other than the lieutenant?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. What if anything would be the lieutenant's
9 responsibilities with regard to that issue?
10 A. In regards to this issue? None whatsoever.
11 Q. I'd like to talk to you a little bit about conditions
12 under which you took the in-basket exam.
13 First, where did you take the test?
14 A. The test was taken by me at Daley College, in a classroom
15 setting.
16 Q. And physically, where did you sit? Did you sit -- did
17 you have a table, a desk?
18 A. I sat at a student's desk, which is like a high school
19 desk. And from there I was given the information package to
20 sort out and assimilate it relevant to the various questions
21 that were going to be asked.
22 Q. Do you believe you had adequate space to organize the 100
23 plus pages of written materials?
24 A. No, sir. And in fact, the two classes that I took
25 earlier in regards to the in-basket, each time we took the
176
Thompson - direct
1 simulation of the in-basket, a table was provided as though
2 you were in an office with a desk setting. You were able to
3 sort through and label at that point across in front of you
4 all the information.
5 At the Daley College the desks were for high school
6 students or college students. I ended up using the floor, the
7 space behind me, around me, wherever I could to lay these
8 documents, and then try to retrieve them based on the various
9 questions that were asked in the multiple choice.
10 Q. In your experience on the job, including your own years
11 as a watch commander, do watch commanders have to review these
12 kind of written materials on the floor of their office?
13 A. No, sir.
14 Q. Where do they do their paperwork?
15 A. The watch commander has an office with a desk, sir.
16 Q. Do you believe that these space constraints affected your
17 performance on the test?
18 A. Absolutely, sir.
19 Q. Why?
20 A. I've been on the job 20 years. In 20 years I've never
21 had to work in these kind of space constraints in regards to
22 any of my assignments, whether it's for reviewing reports or
23 making assignments or anything follow-up. I never had those
24 kind of constraints to work up under, or space.
25 Q. Do you consider yourself an organized person?
177
Thompson - direct
1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. Were you able to organize those materials adequately on
3 the day of the test within the time constraints?
4 A. No, sir. My papers were on the floor, and unfortunately
5 somebody walked by and kicked one of the folders, which caused
6 them to spill out. And that, of course, affected my time
7 trying to reorganize that folder and put it back in sequence
8 and answer the questions.
9 Q. You stated earlier that you were given an hour and a half
10 to answer the multiple choice questions or to do the actual
11 question part of the test.
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. Do you feel that you had sufficient time to answer all
14 the questions correctly?
15 A. No, sir.
16 Q. Why not? Did you run out of time?
17 A. Yes, I did run out of the time, but the problem was the
18 physical constraints that I had in regards to in the work
19 time, once the folder got kicked over by someone going to the
20 washroom, it disorganized my sequence of trying to answer the
21 questions, trying to pick up the documents that came out of
22 the folder, trying to put them back in sequential order and
23 going from there.
24 Q. Is it your experience that Chicago police lieutenants
25 operate under similarly rigid time constraints when doing
178
Thompson - direct
1 their paperwork?
2 A. No, sir.
3 Q. And do you believe that these time constraints affected
4 how well you did on the test?
5 A. Yes, sir, they did.
6 Q. In preparation for this trial, were you given a copy of
7 the in-basket test with the answer key?
8 A. Yes, sir, I was.
9 Q. What did you do with them?
10 A. I took it to my residence, took off the answer key, put
11 out a clock, timed myself, read the materials again, and then
12 commenced to take the exam.
13 But I took it at a desk in my home with adequate
14 space, adequate lighting, and no interruptions in regards to
15 me answering the questions.
16 Q. So you didn't take the test on the floor, did you?
17 A. No, sir.
18 Q. Were you able to answer the questions correctly at your
19 home without the artificial time and space constraints?
20 A. Yes, sir, I was.
21 MR. FUTTERMAN: Your Honor, if I may approach
22 again.
23 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
24 Q. Approximately how long did it take you to take the test
25 when you took it at home to get all the questions right?
179
Thompson - direct
1 A. An hour and 45 minutes.
2 MR. FUTTERMAN: Your Honor, if I may approach.
3 THE COURT: Did they give you the questions with the
4 material originally, or did --
5 THE WITNESS: No, sir.
6 THE COURT: So they gave you the two and a half
7 hours, and then they gave you the questions?
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
9 THE COURT: I see.
10 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
11 Q. I'm now showing you what's marked Defendant's Exhibit
12 21. This, I believe, is another one of the stipulated
13 exhibits that have been admitted into evidence.
14 Sergeant Thompson, can you tell the Court what the
15 title of that document is?
16 A. Chicago police lieutenants examination final scores.
17 Q. And I'd like to direct your attention to page 3 of the
18 document.
19 I'm sorry. Before I do that, what information does
20 this document generally contain?
21 A. It contains the name of what I assume are sergeants,
22 their addresses, their sex, their race, and their scores in
23 regards to the components of the exam, and their ranking.
24 Q. Now, I'd like to direct your attention to page 3, to --
25 and to find the line with the name Guy DeSalvo on it,
180
Thompson - direct
1 D-E-S-A-L-V-O.
2 A. Yes, sir.
3 MR. PIELL: Your Honor, we have a larger size of
4 this. May we hand you a copy of the blown-up size of this
5 exhibit?
6 THE COURT: I have it.
7 MR. PIELL: You're laboring on a smaller size.
8 THE COURT: I can handle it.
9 MR. PIELL: Actually, I think you're on a different
10 exhibit than he's on.
11 THE COURT: I'm looking at Exhibit 21.
12 MR. FUTTERMAN: Entitled Chicago police lieutenants
13 examination final scores. I think that's 22.
14 THE COURT: 22. I see. I see why you made that
15 offer now.
16 MR. FLAXMAN: The parties are working on getting
17 even a more legible version of Exhibit 22.
18 THE COURT: All right. Well, this is helpful.
19 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
20 Q. Sergeant, what does the document indicate regarding
21 Mr. DeSalvo's score on the written portion of the test?
22 A. That his score was 121.
23 Q. Is that the same as your score on the written portion of
24 the test?
25 A. Yes, sir.
181
Thompson - direct
1 THE COURT: I'm looking for his name. Page 3?
2 MR. FUTTERMAN: Line No. 127, page 3. DeSalvo.
3 THE COURT: Okay.
4 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
5 Q. I'm sorry. He had the same score on the written part of
6 the test as you did?
7 A. Yes, sir.
8 Q. Can you find what he scored on the oral portion of the
9 test? What does the document indicate?
10 A. He scored 13.
11 Q. Is that the same as your score on the oral portion of the
12 test?
13 A. Yes, sir.
14 Q. What did Mr. DeSalvo score on the in-basket portion of
15 the test?
16 A. On the in-basket, 56.
17 Q. Is this higher than your score on the in-basket?
18 A. Yes, sir, it is.
19 Q. What does the document indicate that was Mr. DeSalvo's
20 overall rank on the test?
21 A. His overall rank is 102.
22 Q. So according to his test results, Mr. DeSalvo is now a
23 Chicago police lieutenant?
24 A. Yes, sir.
25 Q. Sergeant Thompson, have you been promoted to the rank of
182
Thompson - cross
1 lieutenant as a result of the 1994 lieutenants' promotional
2 exam?
3 A. No, sir.
4 MR. FUTTERMAN: I don't have anything further.
5 CROSS EXAMINATION
6 BY MR. PIELL:
7 Q. Good morning, Sergeant.
8 A. Good morning, Attorney Piell.
9 Q. It's Piell.
10 You testified earlier that you had served as a watch
11 commander in the youth division in Area 4; is that correct?
12 A. That is correct.
13 Q. And you served as a watch commander in the youth division
14 in Area 1, correct?
15 A. That is correct.
16 Q. You have not, however, served as a watch commander in the
17 patrol division; isn't that correct?
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. Isn't it true that when sergeants are promoted to
20 lieutenant, the majority of those new promotees go to the
21 patrol division?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. When you were a watch commander in the youth division,
24 you were responsible for reviewing overtime authorizations;
25 isn't that correct?
183
Thompson - cross
1 A. That is correct.
2 Q. And when you were a watch commander in the youth
3 division, you were responsible for manpower scheduling?
4 MR. FLAXMAN: Could I ask that Mr. Piell slow down
5 so I could be sure that I hear the questions.
6 THE COURT: What about Mr. Futterman? Who is
7 handling this witness?
8 MR. FLAXMAN: I'm just trying to hear the
9 questions. I'm not making an objection, and Mr. Futterman
10 will make the objections, but I think I'm having trouble
11 following his questions.
12 THE COURT: All right. Slow down a little.
13 BY THE WITNESS:
14 A. Would you repeat the question, please?
15 BY MR. PIELL:
16 Q. I apologize if I ask you the same question again, but I
17 will try to not do that.
18 As a watch commander in the youth division, you were
19 responsible for manpower scheduling; isn't that correct?
20 A. Not for manpower scheduling. That's done by the unit
21 secretary, but I ensured that the coverage was made of all the
22 assignments that were required. Not the scheduling itself as
23 to where they were to work.
24 Q. Do you recall that I took your deposition last week?
25 A. Yes.
184
Thompson - cross
1 Q. And you were under oath when you sat for that deposition?
2 A. That is correct.
3 Q. Do you recall at that deposition that I asked you the
4 following question, you gave me the following answer. Page
5 20, Counsel, line 11: "As watch commander in the youth
6 division, are you responsible for working in the field and
7 manpower situations when there is illnesses or leave
8 situations?
9 "Yes." That's what your answer was. Yes.
10 Next question: "Is that one of the significant
11 parts of the watch commander's job, manpower situations"?
12 And your answer was: "In youth division?"
13 And I then answered: "Yes."
14 And you said: "Yes."
15 MR. FUTTERMAN: I'd object as not impeaching.
16 BY MR. PIELL:
17 Q. Do you remember me asking those questions and you giving
18 those answers?
19 THE COURT: Your objection is well noted.
20 I sustain the objection. I don't see that as
21 impeaching.
22 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
23 Q. When you were responsible for whatever responsibilities
24 you had for the manpower situation, you would agree it was
25 important to know the provisions and terms of the FOP contract
185
Thompson - cross
1 in handling those responsibilities?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. As a watch commander in the youth division, you
4 investigated or directed investigations of cases involving on
5 duty or off duty police officers; isn't that correct?
6 A. That is correct.
7 Q. And as a watch commander in the youth division, you
8 investigated incidents where arrestees were hospitalized,
9 correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And as a watch commander in the youth division, you were
12 responsible for ensuring that arrestee processing was done in
13 compliance with CPD directives and orders, correct?
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. When you were ensuring that arrestee processing was done
16 in compliance with CPD directives and orders, it was important
17 to have knowledge of those CPD directives and orders,
18 correct?
19 A. That is correct.
20 Q. As a watch commander, you reviewed forms and reports that
21 were submitted to you by patrol officers, correct?
22 A. No, sir. By youth officers.
23 Q. I'm sorry?
24 A. Youth officers.
25 Q. So you reviewed forms and reports that the youth officers
186
Thompson - cross
1 submitted?
2 A. The follow-up investigators.
3 Q. As a watch commander, you reviewed injury on duty
4 reports, correct?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. As a watch commander, you investigated complaints against
7 the police officers in the youth division, correct?
8 A. Repeat that again, please.
9 Q. As a watch commander, you investigated complaints, any
10 complaints that were filed against police officers in the
11 youth division?
12 A. That is correct.
13 Q. And as a watch commander you investigated --
14 A. May I say, if it was assigned to me. If an investigation
15 was assigned to me, yes, I would do the investigation. As a
16 watch commander in the youth division, I did not review other
17 sergeants' investigations. That was done by the lieutenant.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 As a watch commander, you investigated summary
20 punishment action requests; is that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is that term also referred to as SPAR, S-P-A-R?
23 A. S-P-A-R, that is correct.
24 Q. As a watch commander, you also reviewed case reports
25 prepared by youth officers, correct?
187
Thompson - cross
1 A. That is correct.
2 Q. So as a watch commander you came across a lot of
3 different types of paperwork?
4 A. That is correct. In the youth division, the sergeants
5 have that kind of responsibility and that kind of role.
6 Q. As a watch commander you also reviewed time due slips,
7 correct?
8 A. Yes, that is correct.
9 Q. And as a watch commander in the youth division, you
10 reviewed arrest reports prepared by youth officers, correct?
11 A. That is correct.
12 Q. And when you reviewed written arrest reports, you were
13 responsible for ensuring that the elements of the charge that
14 was identified in those reports were present in those cases,
15 correct?
16 A. That is correct.
17 Q. And to perform that task, you had to have the knowledge
18 regarding the elements of the charges that were involved in
19 those cases, correct?
20 A. That is correct. Or at least where to find the
21 information needed to validate it.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 You testified earlier about the conditions under
24 which you sat for the in-basket component of the lieutenants'
25 exam. Do you recall that testimony?
188
Thompson - cross
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. When you sat for the in-basket exercise, there were other
3 candidates taking the exercise in the same room as you, isn't
4 that correct?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. And isn't it also correct that all the other candidates
7 who sat in that room with you sat at the same type of desk
8 that you sat at?
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. So you all had the same space limitations?
11 A. Yes, sir.
12 Q. And with respect to those other individuals who sat in
13 the same room with you during the in-basket exercise, they all
14 had the same time constraints or time limitation that you had
15 when taking the in-basket exercise?
16 A. Time constraints, yes.
17 Q. When you were given the in-basket component, you actually
18 weren't given a basket, were you?
19 A. No, sir.
20 Q. You were just given a packet of papers?
21 A. A packet of papers. Which were different than the ones
22 given to lieutenants in the patrol division.
23 Q. On your direct testimony -- strike that.
24 Just for clarification, in the patrol division, are
25 you aware of the fact that lieutenants often serve as watch
189
Thompson - cross
1 commanders?
2 A. I'm aware of that, yes.
3 Q. So there are captains who serve as watch commanders and
4 lieutenants who serve as watch commanders?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. And a lieutenant who serves as a watch commander on some
7 days may also serve as a field lieutenant on other days of the
8 week?
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. Now, you testified before that as a watch commander, a
11 lieutenant does not deal with the details of scheduling
12 personnel. Do you recall that testimony?
13 A. Say that again to me, please.
14 Q. I believe you testified that when a lieutenant serves as
15 a watch commander, they're not responsible for scheduling on a
16 shift.
17 A. They don't do the actual scheduling.
18 Q. And I believe you said the watch secretary or the desk
19 sergeant does that scheduling?
20 A. The watch commander secretary does the scheduling.
21 Q. And who supervises the watch secretary?
22 A. The watch secretary is supervised usually by the desk
23 sergeant.
24 Q. And who supervises the desk sergeant?
25 A. The watch commander.
190
Thompson - cross
1 Q. And the time slips and overtime authorizations prepared
2 on the watch are reviewed by the watch commander, correct?
3 A. They are reviewed by the watch commander.
4 Q. And the watch commander is reviewing those documents to
5 make sure that they are prepared correctly; is that correct?
6 A. That is correct.
7 Q. And the watch commander is responsible for making sure
8 that those types of documents are prepared in compliance with
9 CPD directives and the FOP contract, correct?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. With respect to your testimony regarding the crossing
12 guard duties, do you recall talking about crossing guard
13 responsibilities on direct?
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. The in-basket exercise didn't require you to develop a
16 crossing guard plan, did it?
17 A. No, sir. The question asked that --
18 Q. I'm sorry. There is no question pending.
19 A. Oh.
20 Q. I believe you stated on your direct that there are
21 situations where -- strike that.
22 In a situation where crossing guards are not present
23 at a corner or wherever a crossing guard is needed, there is
24 some responsibility for the police department to cover that
25 crossing area; isn't that correct?
191
Thompson - cross
1 A. That is correct.
2 Q. And so if a sergeant is put on that position, that means
3 the sergeant is being moved from a different assignment; isn't
4 that correct?
5 A. That is not correct, sir. What happens, as I said
6 earlier, is that the crossing guard liaison, who is a
7 civilian, gets on the radio, notifies communication that I
8 have a post at 111th Street and Michigan, a school crossing
9 that needs coverage. Okay.
10 The communication person on the radio, dispatcher,
11 then finds out a beat that's available, a beat car, not a
12 sergeant, and then assigns that beat car to cover the
13 crossing, say from 9:00 o'clock to 9:30.
14 Q. So that beat car is assigned to a particular district
15 though, correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And so the watch commander for that district would have
18 some knowledge that a beat car has been assigned to a crossing
19 guard assignment?
20 A. Probably not, sir.
21 Q. You don't know that to be a fact, though, in all
22 situations; isn't that correct?
23 A. No, sir. I don't know that for a fact in all districts.
24 No, I don't know that.
25 Q. You testified earlier that -- you testified earlier about
192
Thompson - cross
1 a CO book, and that you received as a watch commander a lot of
2 information through a CO book. Do you recall that testimony?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. You don't receive all the documents that you review as a
5 watch commander through that CO book, though; isn't that
6 correct?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. So you would receive things like arrest reports and case
9 reports outside of that CO book; is that correct?
10 A. That is correct.
11 Q. And other documents like a CR investigation report or a
12 SPAR form would not come to you through the CO book, correct?
13 A. That is correct.
14 Q. And there are occasions when you're working as a watch
15 commander when you receive more than one type of report or
16 other written information at any given time; isn't that
17 correct?
18 A. More than one report possibly. What I have observed,
19 maybe two or three at one time.
20 Q. Two or three different types of reports that you may
21 receive at the same time; is that what you're saying?
22 A. Not at the same time, no, but they are available. They
23 might need review. You might have people at your door with an
24 arrest report to be reviewed. You might have somebody with a
25 watch commander's log to be signed. But it's never all --
193
Thompson - cross
1 it's different entities that have to be addressed, but not all
2 at one time.
3 Q. That has been your experience as a watch commander in the
4 youth division, correct?
5 A. In the youth division and what I've observed in patrol.
6 Q. You testified earlier about some materials that were
7 provided in the in-basket exercise that are labeled as
8 lieutenant notes. Do you recall that testimony?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And I believe you testified that as a watch commander you
11 wouldn't receive lieutenant notes, but what you would receive
12 are documents that are called to-from subject reports; isn't
13 that correct?
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. And there were some to-from subject reports included in
16 the materials provided in-basket simulation, correct?
17 A. There were some.
18 Q. And with respect to the lieutenant notes to which you
19 were referring, do you recall that those notes contained
20 factual information that was ostensibly provided by a
21 lieutenant in the exercise?
22 A. Repeat that again, please.
23 Q. I apologize. Do you recall with respect to the
24 lieutenant notes that you saw in in-basket exercise, that
25 those notes contained factual information?
194
Thompson - cross
1 A. Not being familiar with notes, lieutenants' notes, I
2 wasn't sure what to expect from them, sir.
3 Q. But what you did see was a document that was providing
4 you with some factual information?
5 A. Information. Factual I don't know, but information, it
6 was just notes.
7 THE COURT: Please wait until he finishes the
8 question before you start your answer.
9 BY MR. PIELL:
10 Q. You stated earlier in your testimony that you do certain
11 types of investigations when you serve as a watch commander,
12 correct?
13 A. That is correct.
14 Q. Have you ever taken over an investigation from some other
15 officer who is handling an investigation?
16 A. As a watch commander?
17 Q. Yes.
18 A. No, sir.
19 Q. Are you aware or -- strike that.
20 Is it possible in your 20 years of experience as a
21 Chicago police officer that there have been situations where
22 other officers have taken over investigations that were
23 started by other either sergeants or lieutenants or watch
24 commanders?
25 A. Yes.
195
Thompson - cross
1 Q. When you're doing an investigation of, say, a weapons
2 discharge incident, in the conduct of that investigation, do
3 you do any oral interviews for information?
4 A. In what capacity? As a sergeant, as a watch commander,
5 as a lieutenant?
6 Q. As a watch commander.
7 A. As a watch commander, yes.
8 Q. So you actually would talk to an officer who was on the
9 scene or involved to develop information?
10 A. That is correct.
11 Q. Correct?
12 If you'll recall, the in-basket exercise required
13 you to review arrest reports for accuracy and completeness;
14 isn't that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. The in-basket exercise required you to review documents
17 regarding a weapons discharge incident, correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And the in-basket exercise required you to review
20 documents regarding complaint register investigations,
21 correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And the in-basket exercise required you to review
24 documents regarding a summary punishment investigation?
25 A. Yes.
196
Thompson - cross
1 Q. With respect to the individual items on the in-basket
2 exercise that you went over on your direct, it's not your
3 testimony that the material needed to answer those questions
4 was not provided to you as part of the test, correct?
5 A. I'm sorry. Repeat that.
6 Q. When you took the in-basket exercise, you had all the
7 information provided to you that you needed to answer the
8 questions correctly in the packet of materials that came with
9 the testing booklet; isn't that correct?
10 A. Not relevant to the Chicago Police Department.
11 Q. In order to answer the questions that were included in
12 the in-basket exercise, the materials were provided to you
13 from which those answers could be derived; is that correct?
14 Or do you not know that?
15 A. The answer, the material was there.
16 Q. So it was provided in a packet?
17 A. In a format that was unfamiliar with the Chicago Police
18 Department.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 You testified earlier that you took this in-basket
21 exercise a second time, correct?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. And you took it a second time after your attorneys
24 provided you with a copy of the in-basket exercise?
25 A. That is correct.
197
Thompson - cross
1 Q. And this is the same exact in-basket exercise that you
2 took back in 1994 as part of the lieutenants' exam, correct?
3 A. Yes, sir.
4 Q. So you had seen all those materials before that were
5 included in the packet; is that correct? The materials in the
6 packet that were provided to you by your attorney were the
7 same materials that were provided to you by the City of
8 Chicago when you took the lieutenants' exam in 1994, correct?
9 A. Yes, sir.
10 Q. And the questions that you answered when you just took
11 the in-basket exercise recently were the same exact questions
12 that were asked to you before when you took the exam in 1994,
13 correct?
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. So you had seen the materials and the questions before?
16 A. That is correct.
17 Q. Sergeant Thompson, you have no idea where you would end
18 up in a scale of scores if the in-basket component was
19 eliminated completely from the 1994 promotional exam, do you?
20 MR. FUTTERMAN: Objection.
21 THE COURT: Overruled.
22 BY MR. PIELL:
23 Q. Do you have any idea where you would end up if that
24 component was completely eliminated?
25 A. I would have been promoted.
198
Thompson - cross
1 Q. Do you have any direct knowledge or facts to show that
2 you would be in the top 108 candidates who took that
3 component, or took all three components that you would have
4 been in that top 108 if the in-basket component was
5 eliminated?
6 MR. FUTTERMAN: Again, this is beyond the scope of
7 her knowledge.
8 THE COURT: She testified about her relative
9 standing with the other sergeants, so I think it's a fair
10 question. If she knows.
11 THE WITNESS: Repeat the question, please.
12 BY MR. PIELL:
13 Q. One more time. You have no direct knowledge or any facts
14 to support your claim that if you eliminated the in-basket
15 component of the exam, you would have been promoted, you would
16 have been in the top 108 scores on this exam?
17 A. Based on the final scores that I have been presented this
18 morning, the answer would be yes, I would have been promoted.
19 My score was 121 in the written. So was Sergeant
20 DeSalvo. My oral was 13 out of 15, the same as his. Based on
21 information that was presented to me today, yes, I would have
22 been promoted, sir, if I did not have this in-basket of
23 material here.
24 Q. And you testified before that Sergeant DeSalvo came in
25 102 on his final score; is that correct?
199
Thompson - cross - redirect
1 A. Yes, sir.
2 Q. And you have no knowledge or any facts that Sergeant
3 DeSalvo would have been promoted or would have been in the top
4 108 scores if the in-basket component had been totally
5 eliminated from the test; isn't that correct?
6 A. I don't have statistical breakdown of what the company
7 used, no, I don't have that available. But based on who they
8 have promoted, and based on the written scores, and based on
9 the oral scores, I would have been promoted to the rank of
10 lieutenant, sir.
11 MR. PIELL: That's all I have. Thank you very much.
12 THE COURT: Thank you.
13 MR. FUTTERMAN: Just a few short questions.
14 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
15 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
16 Q. Sergeant, during all the time you spent as a watch
17 commander, did you have access to a copy of a set of general
18 and special orders?
19 A. Yes, I do. Yes, I did.
20 Q. And did you also have access to a copy of the FOP
21 contract?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. Do you have access to the municipal ordinances?
24 A. Yes, I have my copies of all those that I carry with me
25 in the squad car.
200
Thompson - redirect
1 Q. When you were watch commander?
2 A. Oh, yes, as a watch commander there is a set in the watch
3 commander's office.
4 Q. Is that also true with the general orders and special
5 orders?
6 A. Yes, sir.
7 Q. What about the Illinois criminal statutes?
8 A. Yes, sir. It's available.
9 Q. In the watch commander's office?
10 A. In the watch commander's office.
11 Q. Are you able to look up any of these things?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 MR. FUTTERMAN: I don't have anything else.
14 THE COURT: Anything else?
15 MR. PIELL: We're done.
16 THE COURT: Thank you sergeant, very much.
17 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
18 (Witness excused.)
19 MR. FLAXMAN: Before we proceed with our next
20 witness, there is an evidentiary question that perhaps you
21 could rule on.
22 In the pretrial order, the defendants have
23 identified a series of expert reports which the defendant
24 contends are admissible, the plaintiff contends they are not
25 admissible, they are hearsay, there is no hearsay exception.
201
1 If your Honor rules against the plaintiff on that,
2 then we'll be offering Dr. York's expert report, which he's
3 here to testify about. And I would ask your Honor to rule on
4 that legal issue at this time.
5 MR. HOLZHAUER: Your Honor, I think that's premature
6 at this point because Dr. York's report is not on the exhibit
7 list, so I don't think Mr. Flaxman can offer to admit that
8 report in any event.
9 Secondly, the hearsay, one of the hearsay rules that
10 I relied upon in indicating that they are -- they can be
11 admissible is that that's a matter on which the witness
12 testified, and it goes to his credibility on that testimony.
13 That's part of the 801 rules. I believe your Honor has to
14 hear the testimony before you can tell that.
15 In addition, I think under some circumstances,
16 depending upon the testimony, depending upon the nature of the
17 report and who it's produced for, it can be a record of
18 regularly conducted activity or a public record. So I think
19 that's the strongest claim for Dr. Barrett's first exhibit,
20 which has already been admitted.
21 THE COURT: His first report has been admitted?
22 MR. HOLZHAUER: That's correct.
23 MR. FLAXMAN: Yes. The plaintiff moved his first
24 report.
25 THE COURT: I'm having trouble locating the pretrial
202
1 order here. I suspect I must have taken it into chambers.
2 I don't see how an expert report would get admitted
3 over objection, except to the extent it was used for
4 impeachment purposes. I mean, I've never admitted an expert
5 report as such without something like that, or unless there
6 was an agreement.
7 So if this is a motion in limine, I would be
8 inclined to tell you that those reports are not coming in
9 unless -- I'd have to be convinced beyond any prediction that
10 I will give you right now.
11 MR. HOLZHAUER: Your Honor, I would refer you, I
12 think, to Rule 081 itself. Statements which are not
13 hearsay --
14 THE COURT: But they are hearsay. I assume you're
15 admitting them for the truth of what's in the report,
16 correct?
17 MR. HOLZHAUER: Your Honor, under the 801 (b)
18 definition the following things are not hearsay: a prior
19 statement by the witness if the declarant testifies at trial
20 and it is consistent with declarant's testimony and is offered
21 to rebut an express or implied charge of the declarant of
22 recent fabrication or improper influence or motive.
23 THE COURT: I think I just said that unless the
24 witness is being impeached somehow, they wouldn't be
25 admitted. They are always admitted under that rule on
203
York - direct
1 redirect, if that's where Mr. Flaxman goes with his cross. I
2 don't know whether that's where he'll go or not.
3 MR. HOLZHAUER: That's exactly my point, your
4 Honor. I think it's premature to rule on the admissibility of
5 these things. We're not sure that we're going to move to
6 admit them. We put them on our list because we may move to
7 admit them if the circumstances warrant.
8 THE COURT: I think we understand the rules.
9 MR. FLAXMAN: I do now.
10 Dr. York is our next witness.
11 (Witness sworn.)
12 THE COURT: Have a seat.
13 DR. KENNETH MICHAEL YORK, PLAINTIFFS' WITNESS, DULY SWORN
14 DIRECT EXAMINATION
15 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
16 Q. Could you state your name, please.
17 A. Kenneth Michael York.
18 Q. And what's your business or occupation?
19 A. I'm an assistant professor of management in the School of
20 Business Administration at Oakland University in Rochester,
21 Michigan.
22 Q. Let me show you what I think has been stipulated to as
23 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 135. If we could just take a minute to be
24 sure --
25 MR. HOLZHAUER: That's correct.
204
York - direct
1 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
2 Q. Is Plaintiffs' Exhibit 135 a copy of your curriculum
3 vitae?
4 A. That is correct.
5 Q. And does that set out your education and experience and
6 publications?
7 A. Yes, it does.
8 Q. And briefly, what do you have a Ph.D. in?
9 A. My Ph.D. is in industrial organizational psychology.
10 Q. And what does that mean?
11 A. An industrial organizational psychologist studies the
12 behavior of people at work, which involves such things as
13 recruitment selection, management development, performance
14 appraisal, equal employment opportunity issues and so on.
15 Q. Have you published articles in that field?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And do you teach in that field?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. Are you familiar with assessment centers?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. How have you become familiar with assessment centers?
22 A. Assessment centers are a commonly used tool for
23 management development as well as for selection.
24 I've published a couple of articles in that area,
25 and also created a number of exercises that I use in the class
205
York - direct
1 to help my students understand what assessment centers are and
2 how they're used as well.
3 Q. Are you familiar with something called an in-basket
4 exercise?
5 A. Yes, the in-basket exercise is a frequently used exercise
6 in an assessment center.
7 Q. Did you become familiar with an in-basket exercise in the
8 course of your work as an IO psychologist?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Now, you were retained as an expert in this case; is that
11 right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And what were you asked to do?
14 A. I was asked to look at the in-basket that was used in the
15 police lieutenants' exam to see if it was in fact a
16 traditional in-basket exercise that has been used in industry
17 for a number of years, or if it was not a traditional type of
18 test.
19 Q. And I gave you a copy of the in-basket; is that right?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And did you look at it?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. And then what did you do to answer the question I had
24 posed to you?
25 A. Well, I looked at all of the references that I could find
206
York - direct
1 relating to in-basket and assessment centers more generally to
2 see what people had used as in-baskets in the past in
3 industry, and what had been written about in-baskets for their
4 use both for developmental purposes and for selection
5 purposes, and got a good idea of the way that in-baskets are
6 traditionally done so I could form my opinion as to whether
7 this was a traditional in-basket or not.
8 Q. When you say you reviewed materials, what did you
9 review?
10 A. Well, I reviewed three basic different sources. First I
11 looked at what the textbooks had to say, the human resource
12 management textbooks. Textbooks generally indicate what the
13 state of the field is, the current state of knowledge in a
14 particular area. So I looked at human resource management
15 textbooks to see what they had to say about assessment centers
16 and about in-baskets in particular.
17 I also looked at practitioner articles.
18 Practitioner articles are articles that are written for people
19 who actually do human resources management. They are written
20 to help them to implement various procedures in recruitment
21 and selection, development, et cetera.
22 And then I looked at empirical articles, research
23 articles that investigated the validity of in-baskets'
24 reliability, ratings, issues, et cetera, scientific research
25 done on the in-basket to establish its validity and proper
207
York - direct
1 use.
2 Q. And do you remember how many of those items, those
3 practitioner academic textbooks items you looked at?
4 A. Approximately 75 to 80 articles. Somewhere in that
5 area.
6 Q. And after you submitted an opinion in this case, you were
7 -- you had your deposition taken; is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And after you had your deposition taken, did you get a
10 chance to review some criticisms of your conclusions prepared
11 by Dr. Barrett?
12 A. Yes, I did.
13 Q. After you received those criticisms, did you go look at
14 any more articles?
15 A. Before the deposition I had looked at approximately 60
16 sources. After the deposition I was up to about 77 or so.
17 Most of the additional references were inter-library loans
18 that didn't come in before the deposition, or were references
19 taken from the rebuttal.
20 Q. After reviewing all of those materials, did you -- as you
21 sit here now, do you have an opinion as to whether or not the
22 in-basket exercise in the 1994 lieutenants test is what you
23 would describe as a traditional in-basket?
24 A. This is not a traditional in-basket. It differs
25 fundamentally from the traditional in-basket in a number of
208
York - direct
1 significant ways.
2 In the first case, the traditional in-basket
3 presents the candidates with a collection of materials that
4 they are supposed to take actions on. There's memos, phone
5 messages, documents of all kinds, a variety of materials that
6 they take action on.
7 The assessors then evaluate the actions that the
8 candidates have taken with all of these items: what items
9 they have delegated to others; what items that they have
10 postponed; what meetings they have called, the agendas that
11 they have created for those meetings. And they have to
12 generate those answers themselves and decide what actions to
13 take.
14 In the in-basket here in the Chicago police
15 in-basket, the candidates have all that material in front of
16 them, but after they have looked at all the material, they
17 take a multiple choice test.
18 In looking at all the articles that I looked at,
19 using a multiple choice test to score the in-basket is very
20 unusual. A more traditional way to do it is to evaluate the
21 subjects on a variety of performance dimensions, or perhaps
22 use some kind of scoring key or some accounting rule to look
23 at how they acted on the items rather than to get a multiple
24 choice test.
25 The key difference is that in additional in-basket
209
York - direct
1 the subjects have to generate their own answers as opposed to
2 identifying or recognizing the correct answer in a list of
3 alternatives in each multiple choice question.
4 Q. Is that different, are those two tests different, Doctor?
5 A. Yes, they are very different. In the one case a person
6 has to look at all the materials and figure out the right
7 course of action from an infinite number of possible actions
8 that they could take.
9 In the multiple choice question, they have four or
10 five alternatives, and they have to choose which alternative
11 to take.
12 Q. Now, in the course of your review of the literature about
13 in-baskets, did you form an opinion as to whether or not an
14 in-basket exercise is a valid measure of selecting employees?
15 A. In-baskets have been used for many years to select
16 employees, and they traditionally have very good
17 reliabilities, very good validities, and low adverse impact.
18 So that's why they have been used for 30 or more years.
19 Q. Now, if the Chicago test is not a traditional in-basket,
20 is there any reason to believe it would have the same validity
21 and reliability as a traditional in-basket?
22 A. There is no way to know, because it's fundamentally
23 different. In the one case, you have a multiple choice test,
24 in the other case you have subjects coming up with their own
25 answers as to how to act on each item.
210
York - direct
1 It's so different a situation that you can't infer
2 the validity from the prior research that's done on
3 traditional in-basket designs. The validity of the in-basket
4 test in this case could be as good as a traditional in-basket,
5 it could be better, it could be worse. Until you do a
6 validation study you just don't know.
7 Q. When you say "do a validation study," what do you mean?
8 A. What I mean is that you would take the test scores and
9 see if they correlate with job performance. Essentially what
10 you're doing is seeing if the test predicts later on-the-job
11 performance.
12 Q. And if that hasn't been done, seeing if the test doesn't
13 predict later on-the-job performance, is there any way, of
14 which you're aware, that you can say whether or not the
15 in-basket as administered to the 1994 Chicago promotional
16 lieutenants test was valid?
17 A. Well, there is a number of ways that you could establish
18 the validity of the test.
19 I'm sorry. I should go slower.
20 There are three different ways that you could
21 establish the validity of the test: criterion-related
22 validity, content validity, and construct validity. In
23 criterion-related validity, you measure the correlation
24 between the test scores and job performance.
25 In construct validity, you measure some hypothetical
211
York - direct
1 construct, like administrative skills or leadership, and you
2 then see if the measure of that construct is a predictor of
3 later job performance.
4 In content validity, the test is a representative
5 sample of the job, and that requires a judgment as to whether
6 the test actually is a representative sample of the job.
7 Q. And -- okay.
8 THE COURT: What is construct again?
9 THE WITNESS: Construct validity is a test -- is a
10 measure of some hypothetical construct: administrative
11 skills, leadership, delegation, some hypothetical idea that
12 you're trying to measure. Once you have a measure of that,
13 you can then correlate that with a measure of job
14 performance. The most commonly used one you might find is a
15 measure of cognitive skills, or intelligence, and if that is
16 found to be related to later job performance, then the test
17 would be valid.
18 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
19 Q. Would administrative decision making be a construct?
20 A. That sounds like a construct to me.
21 Q. When you say "it sounds like a construct," what do you
22 mean?
23 A. Well, a construct is a scientific idea. It could involve
24 many different ideas. Just hearing the term, I can't know
25 what you exactly mean by that, but it sounds like a
212
York - direct
1 construct. It sounds like a collection -- it sounds like an
2 idea that explains a collection of possible behaviors.
3 Administrative skills might involve things like
4 ability to delegate, ability to prioritize, recognizing what's
5 important and what's trivial and so on. So it might involve a
6 lot of different things.
7 Q. If you had a test which you said measured administrative
8 decision-making, is that a content theory of development?
9 A. That sounds to me like it would be a construct that
10 you're trying to measure there.
11 Q. Now, you talked about the judgment for a content valid
12 test. For a construct valid test what do you need to say that
13 it's valid?
14 MR. HOLZHAUER: Objection, your Honor. Again, this
15 is the same objection I made the other day, but I think it's
16 even more so. Mr. Flaxman might be nodding that way.
17 This is way beyond -- he didn't talk anything about
18 validation strategy in his expert report, didn't purport to be
19 an expert on validation strategies in any sense.
20 MR. FLAXMAN: I was trying to explore the question,
21 your Honor, but it is beyond his report. I will admit that.
22 THE COURT: Well, I'll sustain the objection.
23 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
24 Q. Now, after your deposition, when you had a chance to
25 review Dr. Barrett's criticisms of your report --
213
York - direct
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. -- do you remember Dr. Barrett criticized your reliance
3 on assessing the work product of people who take an in-basket?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And is that assessment of the work product something that
6 you saw when you reviewed articles about in-baskets?
7 A. Yes. The traditional way that you evaluate candidate
8 performance in the in-basket is that the assessors look at
9 what the candidates have done in the in-basket. They look at
10 the memos that they've written, the phone messages they plan
11 to leave, the meeting agendas that they create, the tasks they
12 delegate to others.
13 Q. And is there any of that looking at the process by which
14 the answers were reached involved in answering these 60
15 multiple choice questions?
16 A. Generally what they're looking at is what they have done,
17 what they've completed. The end product. They don't watch
18 them actually doing the in-basket, sorting the materials, they
19 want to see what actions they've taken.
20 Q. Was that kind of assessment done on the test that you
21 looked at, the lieutenants' test?
22 A. No. In this case, the candidates could do whatever
23 sorting or collating, or whatever they wanted to do with the
24 materials, and then they took the multiple choice test, and
25 nothing that they did with the materials would affect their
214
York - direct
1 multiple choice score.
2 Q. Now, another one of Dr. Barrett's criticisms of your
3 conclusion was that assessing each candidate with assessors is
4 too expensive, that you didn't consider that a thousand people
5 were going to be assessed.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did you revise your opinion based on that criticism?
8 A. I don't think so. I think that when you make selection
9 decisions, they're important decisions. You want to get the
10 right people in the job. There are consequences to making the
11 wrong selection decision.
12 My point of view is that human resource management
13 is an investment in your people that -- in the people that are
14 going to be doing the jobs. So the cost that you invest in
15 good selection decisions is returned in the higher quality of
16 candidates that you end up hiring into those positions.
17 Q. Do you recall that another one of Dr. Barrett's
18 criticisms was that his test was more objective than a
19 traditional in-basket?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And did that criticism cause you to change your opinion?
22 A. I don't think so. I think that in this case, an
23 objective test allows you to get a number. I'm not sure it
24 allows you to get a very good understanding of people's work
25 habits, the way that they handle items, the way that they
215
York - direct
1 understood the situation.
2 One of the advantages of the in-basket and one of
3 the reasons the in-basket was created in the first place is to
4 get a more thorough understanding of the management skills of
5 the candidates being evaluated.
6 When the in-baskets were created in the 1940s and
7 '50s, they were created to get away from paper and pencil
8 tests, because they provided only a limited view of candidate
9 behavior.
10 Putting people in the situation that they would find
11 themselves in in the job and seeing how they react, what
12 actions they would take would provide you with a more complete
13 picture of their management skills.
14 Q. Dr. Barrett also criticized your opinions because he
15 contended that his in-basket was very reliable. Did that
16 criticism cause you to change your opinion?
17 A. Well, in-baskets traditionally have fairly good
18 reliabilities and validities. A multiple choice test
19 obviously has very high validities. The only problem is
20 whatever small degree of error might come with some
21 machine-scored test, which is very small.
22 Q. You said high degree of validity on a multiple choice
23 test.
24 A. I'm sorry. High degrees of reliability on a multiple
25 choice test.
216
York - direct
1 Q. What's the difference between reliability and validity?
2 A. Reliability is the consistency of the measurement,
3 repeated measurement of the same thing which will get you the
4 same number. In the case of a test, if you gave someone a
5 test today and you gave them the same test a week from today,
6 they should get the same number. That's called test retest
7 reliability.
8 You can also measure the internal consistency of a
9 test. The key idea here is that the test, if it's measuring
10 the same thing repeatedly, should give the same answer.
11 Therefore reliability is the upper limit of validity.
12 Therefore the test can be no more valid than it is reliable.
13 So reliability is important. It's the first step to
14 test validity.
15 Q. But if you had a clock that was stopped at 2:00 o'clock,
16 would that be a reliable measure?
17 A. Well, I guess that's a trivial example of reliability.
18 Obviously it's giving you the same answer all the time, but
19 not the correct answer.
20 Q. Would that be a valid measure of the time?
21 A. It would not be a valid measure.
22 Q. Now, Dr. Barrett also criticized your opinions because he
23 argued that his in-basket was content valid.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And did his arguments about content validation cause you
217
York - direct
1 to change your opinions about whether or not empirical
2 evidence was needed to validate the particular test that we're
3 talking about here, the 1994 lieutenants in-basket?
4 A. No, I don't think so in this case, because the job that
5 we're talking about is a management job. It's a complicated
6 job, involves very many tasks that you have to do.
7 If that's the case, then it's very difficult to do a
8 content valid test for it. The more difficult it is to
9 measure the job performance of a particular job, the more
10 difficult it is to create a content valid test for it.
11 For example, if you have the job of data entry
12 clerk, creating a content valid test for that is relatively
13 simple. You sit them in front of a terminal, give them some
14 data to enter typical of the kind of data they would normally
15 enter in that job, and see how well they do.
16 If it's a managerial job it's more difficult,
17 because managers do many different activities throughout the
18 day. So it's more difficult to create a content-valid test.
19 MR. FLAXMAN: I have no further questions. Thank
20 you.
21 CROSS EXAMINATION
22 BY MR. PIELL:
23 Q. Good morning, Doctor.
24 A. Good morning.
25 Q. Greetings from a fellow Michigander.
218
York - cross
1 Just some questions about your background, to
2 start.
3 You have never developed any in-basket exercises for
4 employment selection purposes, have you?
5 A. No.
6 Q. And you have never developed a scoring key or any scoring
7 mechanism for an in-basket selection exercise, have you?
8 A. No.
9 Q. You have never administered an in-basket exercise for
10 employment selection?
11 A. No.
12 Q. You have never actively participated in any way in an
13 in-basket exercise for selection purposes, correct?
14 A. No.
15 Q. No, that's not correct?
16 A. That's correct. I have not.
17 Q. And you have not developed any selection procedures or
18 tasks for the purposes of employment; is that correct?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. And you never developed an in-basket or any other
21 assessment center for any police department or for any safety
22 position; is that correct?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Now, you're not here to offer any opinion regarding the
25 content of the specific questions asked on the Chicago Police
219
York - cross
1 Department in-basket exercise; is that correct?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. And you have no opinion as to whether the in-basket
4 component captured a sufficient portion of the job domain of a
5 lieutenant job; is that correct?
6 A. That is correct.
7 Q. You're not offering an opinion as to the method of test
8 validation performed by Dr. Barrett or Barrett and Associates,
9 correct?
10 A. Correct.
11 MR. FLAXMAN: Objection. That assumes there was a
12 method of test validation performed, which is a fact not in
13 evidence.
14 THE COURT: Therefore the answer is no.
15 MR. PIELL: Which I believe the answer was no.
16 BY MR. PIELL:
17 Q. And you are not offering an opinion as to whether the
18 in-basket exercise utilized in the 1994 Chicago Police
19 Department lieutenant exam was valid or not, correct?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. In fact, you have no opinion as to whether this in-basket
22 test is content valid, correct?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. You are not familiar with the Chicago Police Department
25 in any particularities or detail; is that correct?
220
York - cross
1 A. Not in any detail, no.
2 Q. You have no familiarity or knowledge with any municipal
3 police department in the country?
4 A. No.
5 Q. You have not done any specific work with any police
6 department; is that correct?
7 A. That's correct.
8 Q. You have no detailed knowledge about the job of police
9 lieutenant in the Chicago Police Department, correct?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. And in preparing your expert report you didn't interview
12 or speak with any lieutenants in the Chicago Police
13 Department, correct?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. You didn't interview any of the plaintiffs in this case,
16 correct?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. You didn't speak with any police department personnel
19 from Chicago or any other city with respect to this case,
20 correct?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. And at the time you issued your opinion in this matter,
23 you had not seen or reviewed the job analysis for the
24 lieutenant position prepared by Barrett and Associates,
25 correct?
221
York - cross
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. And you have not performed any job analysis on your own
3 for any rank in the Chicago Police Department, correct?
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. And isn't it true that you do not know the performance
6 dimensions that the in-basket for the Chicago Police
7 Department lieutenants exam was trying to test?
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. And you don't know what knowledge, skills, and abilities
10 were sought to be captured by the in-basket exercise of the
11 Chicago Police Department exam, correct?
12 A. Correct.
13 MR. PIELL: One second, please.
14 (Brief pause.)
15 BY MR. PIELL:
16 Q. Dr. York, you know who Dr. Gerald Barrett is, do you not?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And at a deposition you gave in this matter you conceded
19 that you were less of an expert than Dr. Barrett in test
20 validation because you lacked the practical real world
21 experience that he has?
22 A. Yes.
23 MR. FLAXMAN: Objection.
24 MR. PIELL: That's all I have. Thank you.
25 THE COURT: Wait a minute, counsel. There is an
222
York - cross - redirect
1 objection. You don't just walk away from an objection.
2 Your objection is based on what?
3 MR. FLAXMAN: It's argumentative, and it is not
4 relevant.
5 THE COURT: Overruled.
6 MR. PIELL: Thank you. That's all I have.
7 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
8 BY MR. FLAXMAN:
9 Q. All those things Mr. Piell asked you that you said you
10 didn't know, did you need to know about the job analysis
11 before forming your opinion that empirical evidence was
12 necessary before you could say that the Barrett in-basket had
13 the same validity as a traditional in-basket?
14 A. No, I didn't need that. I was just looking at the way
15 the test was administered and scored.
16 Q. So you didn't need to know -- you didn't need to talk to
17 any of the plaintiffs?
18 A. No.
19 Q. You didn't need to know anything about the job of
20 policeman?
21 A. No.
22 Q. In fact, all you needed to do was to look at the test and
23 do your library research?
24 A. Right. I needed to look at the test and read as many
25 articles as I could find on the in-basket, and see which ones
223
Hardy - direct
1 used a multiple choice for in-basket and which ones used a
2 traditional design.
3 Q. Now, Mr. Piell asked you whether you thought Dr. Barrett
4 is more experienced in test validation than you are. Do you
5 think Dr. Barrett is more experienced in doing library
6 research than you are?
7 A. I don't know. I've done quite a bit of it.
8 Q. Are you real good at library research?
9 A. For this project, I used every electronic resource that I
10 had available at Oakland University. Karl and Kuber, ABIN
11 form, Lewis, everything I could use to find the information
12 that's out there in various libraries.
13 MR. FLAXMAN: Thank you. Nothing further.
14 THE COURT: Anything else?
15 MR. PIELL: One second, please.
16 We have nothing further, your Honor.
17 THE COURT: Thank you. You're excused, sir.
18 (Witness excused.)
19 THE COURT: Do you have your next witness?
20 MR. FLAXMAN: Yes.
21 (Witness sworn.)
22 JUDGE F. HARDY, PLAINTIFFS' WITNESS, DULY SWORN
23 DIRECT EXAMINATION
24 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
25 Q. Good morning, Sergeant. Could you please introduce
224
Hardy - direct
1 yourself to the Court and spell your last name for the court
2 reporter.
3 A. My name is Sergeant Judge F. Hardy. That's H-A-R-D-Y.
4 Q. Where do you work, Sergeant Hardy?
5 A. I'm currently assigned to the 4th District.
6 Q. I'm sorry?
7 A. I'm currently assigned to the 4th District.
8 Q. For the Chicago Police Department?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. When did you begin working for the Chicago Police
11 Department?
12 A. My actual appointment day is 22 October of '73.
13 Q. Where did you start working when you were first assigned
14 to the department?
15 A. After leaving the police academy, I was assigned to the
16 3rd District.
17 Q. What were your initial assignments?
18 A. Patrol duties.
19 Q. How long were you in the 3rd District doing patrol?
20 A. Probably six to eight months.
21 Q. Where did you go after you left the 3rd District?
22 A. After leaving the 3rd District I was assigned to Chicago
23 Police Department's mass transit unit.
24 Q. And still as a patrol officer?
25 A. Yes.
225
Hardy - direct
1 Q. How long were you in mass transit?
2 A. About three or four years.
3 Q. And after mass transit, where did you go?
4 A. I went briefly to the 5th District. I stayed about a
5 month in the 5th District, maybe two months, and then I went
6 to the 22nd District.
7 Q. On both occasions still on patrol?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. When that's on patrol, that's out in the field; is that
10 correct?
11 A. This is correct.
12 Q. After doing those couple months there, what was your next
13 assignment?
14 A. 1978 November I was promoted to youth officer.
15 Q. Where were you assigned as a youth officer?
16 A. My original assignment was Area 2 youth.
17 Q. Where is Area 2?
18 A. At the time that I was originally assigned, Area 2 was at
19 91st and Cottage Grove. It's later been moved to 727 West
20 111th.
21 Q. I guess what I meant was --
22 A. I'm sorry.
23 Q. -- what geographical area does that cover?
24 A. Far south side, far south and southeast side.
25 Q. How long were you working as a youth officer in Area 2,
226
Hardy - direct
1 approximately?
2 A. About two years.
3 Q. During that two-year period were you entirely out in the
4 field?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Where did you go after leaving Area 2?
7 A. I went back to patrol for a short stint. I was assigned
8 to Mayor Washington's security detail for a period of time.
9 Q. What were your duties on that detail, on Mayor
10 Washington's detail?
11 A. I did the house security in and around his house, and
12 occasional relief on the personal bodyguard detail.
13 Q. After that patrol assignment and the detail assignment to
14 Mayor Washington, where did you go next?
15 A. I was assigned back to the youth division.
16 Q. Back in Area 2?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And how long did you spend there?
19 A. I stayed a period -- when I -- when I came back to the
20 youth division, I went to Area 2, then 4, then 2, then 1.
21 Q. Okay. What were you doing during that time period in the
22 various areas?
23 A. The basic youth officer's duties, processing juveniles.
24 Q. And you were in the field again?
25 A. Yes.
227
Hardy - direct
1 Q. After going back and forth between those areas as a youth
2 officer, what did you do next?
3 A. In November of 1990 I was promoted to sergeant.
4 Q. Where were you first assigned as a sergeant in November
5 '90?
6 A. 3rd District.
7 Q. And what were your duties of your first assignment?
8 A. Field duties. Field supervisory duties.
9 Q. Okay. And how long were you working as a field
10 supervisor in that 3rd District?
11 A. Three or four months. I'm not -- about three or four
12 months.
13 Q. Where did you go from then?
14 A. I went to Chicago Police Department's public housing
15 unit.
16 Q. What was your title in the public housing unit?
17 A. I was the midnight watch commander and later became the
18 third watch watch commander.
19 Q. And how long were you working as a watch commander in
20 public housing?
21 A. About three years, two to three years.
22 Q. After you left public housing as a watch commander, where
23 did you go next?
24 A. 4th District.
25 Q. What was your assignment in the 4th District?
228
Hardy - direct
1 A. Field supervisor.
2 Q. I'm sorry. Back when you were working as a watch
3 commander, is that considered an inside or an outside job?
4 A. Inside.
5 Q. What does that mean -- what does an inside job mean?
6 A. Well, actually as a watch commander we were responsible
7 for the roll call functions, the check off from the previous
8 watches.
9 We were also responsible to ensure that anything
10 that was assigned to the particular watch that I was the watch
11 commander of, as the orders came out or came through the CO
12 book, that they were implemented and carried out.
13 Q. And then you said you went back into the field?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. As a supervisor?
16 A. In the 4th District, yes.
17 Q. As field supervisor, what are your responsibilities?
18 A. To supervise the day-to-day activities of patrol officers
19 assigned to the 4th District, responding to assignments.
20 Q. About how long did you spend as a field supervisor in the
21 4th?
22 A. I'm still currently assigned, from the time I left public
23 housing to this date I'm still assigned to the 4th District.
24 Q. About how long has that been?
25 A. About three years.
229
Hardy - direct
1 Q. And you said you spent about two to three years as a
2 watch commander in public housing?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Have you -- do you have any particular management or
5 supervisory training, either before or during the time you've
6 been a Chicago police officer?
7 A. Yes, I attended the University of Illinois' supervisors
8 managerial course provided by the police department.
9 Q. Did you complete the course?
10 A. I sure did.
11 Q. When did you complete that course? Approximately what
12 year?
13 A. About two years ago.
14 Q. Based on your experience and observations on the job
15 since 1973, are you familiar with what Chicago police
16 lieutenants do?
17 A. Yes, I am.
18 Q. How are you so familiar?
19 A. Well, as a watch commander, I perform the duties that
20 would normally be performed by a lieutenant.
21 As a field sergeant, I worked very closely with the
22 lieutenants assigned to the districts in the fields, and on
23 occasions I'm called upon to act as a field lieutenant when we
24 don't have a field lieutenant up and available or assigned at
25 night, or if we have more than the normal or more than the
230
Hardy - direct
1 needed number of sergeants. Say we have three sergeants --
2 say we have four sergeants and we only need three, and there
3 is no 90 or no lieutenant available --
4 Q. 90 is lieutenant?
5 A. Yes. Then I could be assigned as 90 for that tour of
6 duty.
7 Q. And even as a field sergeant, who is your immediate
8 supervisor?
9 A. The watch commander.
10 Q. The lieutenant?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. You took the lieutenants promotional exam in 1994?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. You prepared for that exam?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. How did you do so?
17 A. Well, I studied probably six months or eight months
18 before the test, materials that we thought would be part of
19 the test. I participated in three different study groups. I
20 put in, I would say, two hours a day for over eight months.
21 Q. Did you say you took any classes as well?
22 A. Yes. I took -- I paid for a class on how to do
23 in-baskets, and I belonged, like I said, to two studies groups
24 where we studied in-baskets, we studied oral briefings and
25 written examinations.
231
Hardy - direct
1 Q. When you said you were studying an average of two hours a
2 day, is that every day?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And really, again, I'd like to direct you -- I would like
5 to talk more about the in-basket portion of the exam.
6 MR. FUTTERMAN: May I approach, your Honor?
7 THE COURT: You may.
8 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
9 Q. I'm showing you what's marked Defendant's Exhibit 15
10 that's been admitted into evidence. Can you tell the Judge
11 what that is?
12 A. This is the Chicago Police Department's lieutenants'
13 in-basket simulation.
14 Q. Is that the test that you took in 1994?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. What did this test require you to do, in your opinion?
17 A. It required me to do a lot of reading, and answer
18 multiple choice questions.
19 Q. In your opinion, was the in-basket exercise
20 representative of what Chicago police lieutenants do on the
21 job?
22 A. In my almost 25 years as a Chicago policeman, working
23 very closely with the watch commander, working as a watch
24 commander, working very closely with lieutenants, this is
25 nothing that I've ever seen a lieutenant do in my years as a
232
Hardy - direct
1 policeman.
2 Q. Have you ever seen anything like an in-basket on the job
3 in a watch commander's office or in a field lieutenant's car?
4 A. Never.
5 Q. Well, how do lieutenants get -- how do they get their
6 work? How do they get their work assignments?
7 A. Lieutenants are usually given their assignments through
8 the CO book. They're -- or given assignments directly from
9 the watch commander, told that they're needed to do this, or
10 would they check on this. But never through anything like
11 this.
12 Q. Do Chicago police lieutenants, in your 25 years of
13 experience, have to organize and collate hundreds of pages of
14 materials to start their tour of duty?
15 A. No, they don't.
16 Q. What do they do when they get the CO book? What are the
17 responsibilities of a lieutenant once they get the orders in
18 the CO book?
19 A. The lieutenant will read through the book, he will make
20 the notifications, and he will probably make those people who
21 need to be alerted that there is something in the book that
22 concerns them that they need to be aware of, and probably sign
23 off as notifying those persons, and have those persons sign
24 the book as being notified.
25 Q. Do they have to organize the materials in the book?
233
Hardy - direct
1 A. No.
2 Q. Now, you said that you never saw anything like this
3 in-basket exercise on the job. Can you give the Court some
4 examples of what you mean by that?
5 A. Well, the way this was set up, I've never seen a
6 situation where -- and I've been assigned, as I said, as a
7 watch commander, I've been present when a watch commander has
8 arrived for his tour of duty when he has sat down as his desk,
9 and I've also had the opportunity to sit in the watch
10 commander's office when the watch commander has to leave out.
11 Our district commander has a policy that someone
12 will always be sitting in that seat with a white shirt. So
13 I've had an opportunity on a number of occasions to sit in
14 that seat and see exactly what comes across that desk, and in
15 all my years, I've never seen anything like this at all.
16 I've never seen a lieutenant have to go through a
17 hundred pages of material, I've never seen a lieutenant have
18 to put any of this material or anything that he needs to read
19 on the floor of his office, get down on his knees, and try to
20 prepare or put in order anything to be presented.
21 Q. I'd like you to look at a few particular questions on the
22 test again as examples.
23 THE COURT: I think we're going to do this after
24 lunch. Let's break for -- let's say 1:25. 1:25.
25 (Recess at 12:20 p.m.)
234
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
2 EASTERN DIVISION
3 ERNEST T. BROWN, et al., )
)
4 Plaintiffs, )
) No. 95 C 1890
5 v. ) Chicago, Illinois
) November 19, 1997
6 CITY OF CHICAGO, ) 1:30 p.m.
)
7 Defendant. )
8 VOLUME 2
9 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS - TRIAL
10 BEFORE THE HONORABLE ROBERT W. GETTLEMAN
11 APPEARANCES:
12 For the Plaintiffs: KENNETH N. FLAXMAN, P.C.
122 South Michigan Avenue
13 Suite 1850
Chicago, Illinois 60603-6107
14 BY: MR. KENNETH N. FLAXMAN
15 and
16 FUTTERMAN & HOWARD, CHTD.
122 South Michigan Avenue
17 Suite 1850
Chicago, Illinois 60603
18 BY: MR. CRAIG FUTTERMAN
19
For the Defendant: MAYER, BROWN & PLATT
20 190 South LaSalle Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
21 BY: MR. JAMES HOLZHAUER
MR. JEFFREY S. PIELL
22 MS. ANGELA K. DORN
MR. ANDREW NICELY
23
Official Court Reporter: JENNIFER S. COSTALES, CSR, RMR
24 219 South Dearborn Street
Room 1744-A
25 Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 427-5351
235
Hardy - direct
1 (Proceedings heard in open court.)
2 THE COURT: Mr. Hardy, you're still under oath.
3 JUDGE HARDY, PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS, PREVIOUSLY SWORN
4 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Resumed)
5 BY MR. FUTTERMAN:
6 Q. All right, Sergeant Hardy, we were just about to look at
7 Defendant's Exhibit 15 again, the test, the in-basket test. I
8 was going to have you look at question No. 29, which is Bates
9 8439.
10 A. Question 29?
11 Q. Right. Tell me when you've found it.
12 A. So that we're on the same page, is this a complaint
13 registered investigation of Officer McKay?
14 Q. Correct.
15 A. Okay.
16 Q. Take a look at question No. 29 and tell me what you need to
17 do to answer that question correctly on the test.
18 A. I would need to go back and read all of the information
19 leading up to this question. I would have to go back through
20 all of the material, pull that material and, I guess, sort that
21 material to make the determination as to who this would be
22 assigned to.
23 Q. Is that the sort of thing that an actual Chicago police
24 lieutenant would have to do?
25 A. No.
236
Hardy - direct
1 Q. Why not? What would a Chicago police lieutenant have to
2 do?
3 A. If a CR number was to be assigned to an officer on your
4 watch, you would know based on --
5 Q. Could you speak up a little bit?
6 A. I'm sorry.
7 If a CR number was to be assigned to someone on your
8 watch, there is a log that you go through. And it's done in
9 sequence, meaning that each supervisor is given a CR number,
10 and the next one up would get the next CR number.
11 Q. Let's look at another question. How about question No. 30,
12 same page, 8439?
13 A. Again, I would have to read all of the material, go through
14 it to make the determination as to who should be assigned to
15 counsel Officer Towns.
16 Q. Would a Chicago police lieutenant have to do that in the
17 real world?
18 A. No, we wouldn't.
19 Q. Why not?
20 A. Because the supervisor and the sergeant who supervises
21 Officer Towns would be given that assignment, and I would know
22 who that supervisor is based on the schedule or the listing for
23 that day.
24 Q. You wouldn't have to go through a hundred pages of material
25 to figure that out?
237
Hardy - direct
1 A. No, I wouldn't.
2 Q. How about question 34, which is Bates 8440? To answer that
3 question, what would you have to do?
4 A. Again, I would have to read and go through all of the
5 information that was provided for this question to make the
6 determination as to who would be assigned.
7 Q. In the real world, how would the lieutenant make this
8 determination?
9 A. Well, first of all, in the real world, if it was determined
10 that a crime in fact had been committed, he would have an
11 officer, he would have an officer assigned to make a case
12 report.
13 And once the case report is initiated, it would go
14 through channels. Our criminal investigation or our detective
15 division would then be assigned to do the follow-up on this.
16 Q. So when you say an officer would be assigned in the first
17 instance, are you speaking of a patrol or a beat officer?
18 A. Yes, I am.
19 Q. Then when it goes through channels, who would approve the
20 patrol or beat officer's report?
21 A. The sergeant, his supervising sergeant.
22 Q. Would the lieutenant ever review that case report?
23 A. In all likelihood, no.
24 Q. Why not?
25 A. Unless there was some, some real significance that was
238
Hardy - direct
1 attached to this particular incident that he felt that he
2 needed to be involved in, in all likelihood, he wouldn't, he
3 wouldn't look at it.
4 Q. Is there a spot for the lieutenant to sign off on case
5 reports?
6 A. No, there isn't.
7 Q. How about for sergeants?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. How about another question, question 48 page 8445. Are you
10 with me, Sergeant?
11 A. Yes, I am.
12 Q. Okay, same question: What would you have to do to answer
13 it, first on the test?
14 A. Again, I would have to go through the material. I would
15 have to determine what day-off group the officers were in and
16 what day-off group was off on this particular day and make that
17 decision based on going through all the material.
18 Q. Do Chicago police lieutenants do that kind of work?
19 A. No, they don't.
20 Q. Why not?
21 A. Well, we have a desk officer whose primary responsibility
22 is to make sure that these kinds of things are filled.
23 Q. Lieutenants don't do that?
24 A. No, we don't.
25 Q. What, if anything, would be a lieutenant's role after the
239
Hardy - direct
1 desk officer did it in the first instance?
2 A. The lieutenant's role is just to approve the report. I
3 mean, whatever the desk officer decided to do in this
4 particular incident, the signature would be required of the
5 watch commander. A lieutenant wouldn't even get involved. A
6 field lieutenant wouldn't be involved in this at all.
7 Q. Let's look at one more question, question 49, same page,
8 8445. Take a chance and review that one.
9 Same question: What would you need to do to answer
10 that question correctly on the test?
11 A. I would have to go through all of the papers, sort those
12 papers to determine the day-off groups, and I'd have to
13 determine based on seniority who had the least amount of
14 seniority in order to make this decision.
15 Q. Do Chicago police lieutenants do this kind of work in real
16 life?
17 A. Not really. The field lieutenant, no.
18 Q. How about the police lieutenants who are watch commanders?
19 A. The watch commander would not do this. But the watch
20 commander could get involved in this. But this would not
21 normally be his function or his duty.
22 Q. Whose duty is it?
23 A. The desk clerk, or the desk officer, if you want to refer
24 to him as that.
25 Q. So if at any time a watch commander would be involved, it
240
Hardy - direct
1 wouldn't be in doing the actual scheduling, would it?
2 A. No.
3 Q. It would only be in approving something that was already
4 done?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. I'd like to direct your attention to a couple of pages of
7 the written materials and the tests. I'm going to hand them up
8 to you, first what's Bates stamped as 8462, same exhibit.
9 Is what's Bates stamped 8462, the document in front
10 of you, is that the type of document you would see as a
11 lieutenant on the job?
12 A. I've never seen anything like this.
13 Q. What is it or what does it appear to be?
14 A. It appears to be a work assignment.
15 Q. How do -- is there anything like it that a police
16 lieutenant, Chicago police lieutenant might see or anything
17 that would cover that issue?
18 A. In all my years, I've never seen anything like this.
19 Q. Let me move to the next consecutive page on the test, 8463.
20 Take a look at that.
21 Is that something that a Chicago police lieutenant
22 would see on the job in that form?
23 A. This looks like a personnel roster. And a lieutenant might
24 see a personnel roster.
25 Q. Do Chicago police departments have personnel rosters in
241
Hardy - direct
1 that form?
2 A. No.
3 Q. What do they use?
4 A. They use -- if we're talking about particular watches?
5 Q. Uh-huh.
6 A. Or are we talking about assigned to a district or the unit
7 itself?
8 Q. Start with a particular watch. Would that be an attendance
9 and assignment sheet?
10 A. No.
11 Q. What would it be?
12 A. Could you repeat the question? I'm sorry.
13 Q. I'm sorry.
14 You said that first a roster for a particular watch.
15 What form would that be on the Chicago police department?
16 A. Well, it would be in the form of who is assigned to what
17 car. And usually they have -- they'll have also the assigned
18 lunch times. The beats and the assigned lunch times are
19 usually listed on the day-to-day rosters.
20 Q. Do you know what those day-to-day rosters are called?
21 A. We just call them the "sheets." How do I appear on the
22 sheet for this particular day?
23 Q. Did it look anything like what you see in front of you?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Now, you referred to another sort of roster. It slips my
242
Hardy - direct
1 mind. You said there was another kind of personnel roster?
2 A. The A&A sheets?
3 Q. Yes.
4 Does that look anything like an A&A sheet?
5 A. Nothing.
6 Q. Does it look like anything that a lieutenant normally sees
7 on the job in the Chicago Police Department?
8 A. Not in any of the years that I've been associated with the
9 Chicago Police Department.
10 Q. Okay. Let's look at the next consecutive sheet of
11 materials, 8464.
12 The same question: Is that the type of material that
13 you would see as a police lieutenant on the job in the Chicago
14 Police Department?
15 A. Somewhat, it's somewhat similar to it.
16 Q. What is it?
17 A. This is the sector assignments for the second watch. And
18 it lists the officers and the supervising sergeant for the two
19 sectors --
20 Q. Is that --
21 A. -- or the three sectors.
22 Q. I'm sorry.
23 Is that in the same form that you would see something
24 like that on the Chicago Police Department?
25 A. Not quite, no.
243
Hardy - direct
1 Q. Let me give you another -- two pages later, 8466. Is that
2 something you would see as a Chicago police lieutenant?
3 A. No.
4 Q. What is it?
5 A. This is a weapons -- this is Lieutenant Robert Joseph's
6 notes. And it's in regards to a weapons discharge
7 investigation.
8 Q. Would you see another lieutenant's notes with regard to a
9 weapons discharge investigation?
10 A. No, no, you would not.
11 Q. Why not?
12 A. Usually these investigations are kind of held by the
13 lieutenant and are not privy for anybody to take a look at.
14 Q. Let me show you just one more sheet, the next consecutive
15 sheet just by way of example, 8467, and I'll move on.
16 Does that sheet -- is that sheet in the same form of
17 written material that you would see as a Chicago police
18 lieutenant?
19 A. You might see this report.
20 Q. And what is it?
21 A. This is a to/from/subject from one of the officers that --
22 who witnessed the weapons discharge of Officer Essex.
23 Q. In Chicago Police Department to/from reports written by
24 other officers, do the officers refer to themselves by "I" or
25 "me" as it is in that report? Is that standard Chicago Police
244
Hardy - direct
1 Department lingo, so to speak? Is that the form in which you
2 would see things?
3 A. Not really, no.
4 Q. What would you see?
5 A. The reporting officer, meaning himself, when he refers to
6 himself, he would go "reporting officer" or "RO."
7 Q. In summary -- let me have those materials.
8 The majority of materials that you had to review to
9 answer those questions, were they like the materials that a
10 lieutenant sees on a day-to-day basis?
11 A. I would say no.
12 Q. You mentioned a little bit earlier or near the beginning of
13 your testimony that you had to put the materials on the floor
14 to take the test?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do watch commanders ever have to work on the floor?
17 A. In my 27 years, I've never seen a watch commander on his
18 hands and knees working on the floor.
19 Q. Do you believe that having to work on the floor with the
20 materials spread out over the floor raised any security
21 concerns about the test?
22 A. A great number. In the classroom that I was in, I observed
23 some things that I thought were a little unusual.
24 Q. Can you explain?
25 A. Well, I didn't realize at the time exactly what was going
245
Hardy - direct
1 on, because I was basically concentrating on what was going on
2 in my area in terms of what was happening on my desk, in and
3 around my area.
4 But I observed, and I made mention of it, that there
5 were three guys who seemed to be working in harmony together.
6 I mean, they seemed to be doing something that all three seemed
7 to be a part of. And I witnessed one of them exchange papers
8 with the other one, not paper but booklet, because we were
9 setting things on the floor, I saw his booklet on the floor,
10 and I thought that he had accidentally kicked his booklet. But
11 what actually happened was the guy in front of him picked up
12 his booklet, and he put his booklet on the floor, and so they
13 actually exchanged booklets.
14 Q. Do you believe the conditions under which you took the test
15 allowed for opportunities to cheat?
16 A. Very much so.
17 Q. Now, you said you were allotted a particular amount of time
18 to complete the multiple-choice questions?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. Do you believe those time constraints affected how well you
21 did on the test?
22 A. I think so.
23 Q. Did you run out of time when you took the test?
24 A. I sure did.
25 Q. Now, the other day you had an opportunity to see what
246
Hardy - direct
1 questions you got wrong on the test, is that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you get a lot of the last 10 or 15 or so questions
4 wrong?
5 A. I sure did.
6 Q. Why?
7 A. Basically guessed at them when they told us it was time to
8 put the pencils down. I basically guessed the last, you know,
9 last 10 or 15 questions.
10 Q. Now, you also from co-counsel have had an opportunity to
11 take in-basket tests home with you?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. What did you do