Baltimore Police to review for ‘undue influence’ in officer discipline cases

Baltimore Police have created a new process for reviewing internal affairs cases for officers who believe their discipline was tainted by “undue influence.”

The development follows by about a month the resignation of Deputy Commissioner Brian Nadeau, who oversaw internal affairs and was himself the subject of a misconduct investigation when he stepped down. Nadeau was heralded by some officials for overhauling a flawed internal affairs process but also faced a number of lawsuits, some of which accused him of bending officer discipline to his will.

Lt. Elliot Cohen, the recently elected president of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 3, which represents Baltimore Police’s rank-and-file officers, notified the union in an email Monday that BPD had agreed to create the review process in response to “concerns over undue influence that may have affected members’ disciplinary cases.”

“We get concerns from members. They just feel like they weren’t treated fairly in the disciplinary process. Sometimes they’re fair criticism, sometimes they’re not,” Cohen said in an interview. “We just kind of set something up, that if people feel like they were treated unfairly, that there was a formal process to address the concerns.”

Cohen said the discussions about the review process predated Nadeau’s departure and were unrelated to his resignation.

Pressed about whose “undue influence” his email referred to, Cohen said the language was intended to be broad. “Any undue influence from anyone,” he said.

But department policy dictates that the person in Nadeau’s position signs off on all findings of internal affairs detectives and, based on what was found, recommends discipline. Lawsuits allege Nadeau told the administrative hearing officers who decide discipline that their role was merely to rubber stamp his recommendations.

Nadeau could not be reached for comment.

Lindsey Eldridge, Baltimore Police’s chief spokesperson, confirmed the new review process. In an emailed statement, she said that the department was committed to ensuring that all disciplinary matters are handled fairly and outlined the process for officers to submit their cases for review.

Eldridge did not, however, answer a question about whether there was a connection to Nadeau.

“While the Department does not believe that undue influence has affected its disciplinary proceedings, it is important to listen to our members and take their concerns seriously,” Eldridge said. “This effort reflects the Department’s commitment to transparency, accountability, and ensuring that every member has confidence in the integrity of the disciplinary process.”

Cohen’s email to the union included a link to a digital form titled “Undue Influence from PID,” which refers to the public integrity division of the Police Department. The form gives officers a maximum of 500 characters to provide “specific” evidence of why they believe their cases were tainted.

In his email, the new union president praised Commissioner Richard Worley for listening to officers’ concerns and working with the union to “ensure a fair disciplinary process.”

The development also comes as the department fights lawsuits filed by at least half a dozen current and former officers alleging they were wrongfully fired or unfairly disciplined under Nadeau. The ongoing federal and state complaints accused Nadeau of overseeing a unit with a propensity for retaliating against officers who complained and of doling out disparate punishments.

One detective said he was fired at Nadeau’s discretion for a minor timekeeping infraction. A different police officer said Nadeau’s internal affairs investigators leaked details of her internal complaint to a civilian who harassed the officer. Yet another detective claimed he was suspended at Nadeau’s direction after being accused of using marijuana, despite using nonintoxicating cannabinoid ointment to treat pain from a foot injury he sustained after being struck by a drunk driver on duty.

Michael Turiello, an attorney for the officers who sued Nadeau and Baltimore Police, said in a statement that concerns about undue influence date to at least 2022.

“Since then, numerous other current and former BPD employees have filed lawsuits alleging the same undue influence and retaliation,” Turiello said. “I’m concerned that BPD took so long to formally address this issue, while operating under the Consent Decree, and question why it only did so after Deputy Commissioner Brian Nadeau’s resignation.”

Maryland State Police was handling the misconduct investigation into Nadeau before he resigned. The agency said it would turn the case back over to Baltimore Police when it concluded its probe.

This story has been updated.