Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Conduct Termination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conway police chief terminates Officer Britney Byrd after review board cites failure to respond and untruthfulness
Summary
A Conway Police Department review board and the chief concluded Officer Britney Byrd violated multiple department policies after the April 13, 2025 mass shooting; members cited a failure to respond expeditiously, shutting off cameras and untruthful statements during an internal interview.
Get email alerts on the Police Conduct Termination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chief Harris terminated Conway Police Officer Britney Byrd after a departmental review board recommended dismissal, concluding she violated six departmental policies in the department’s response to a mass shooting at Fifth Avenue Park on April 13, 2025.
The review board’s recommendation, the chief’s decision and the testimony supporting that outcome centered on three findings from the investigative file and video evidence: that Byrd did not respond with the urgency the department’s code 3 response requires; that she deactivated recording equipment while responding and drove a circuitous route rather than directly to the park; and that she made statements to an internal investigator that review-board members considered untruthful.
The board considered about a month of investigative material, including officer interviews, radio traffic, GPS tracks, dash- and body-camera footage and officer testimony, members said. Major Clay Smith, a review-board member and the major assigned over the criminal investigations division, told the hearing that after reviewing the file he identified “two major concerns” with Byrd’s conduct and concluded the investigation showed untruthfulness and conduct unbecoming. “Untruthfulness is always a terminable offense,” Major Smith testified, and he said his “recommendation was termination.”
Major James Presley, another review-board member who reviewed Lieutenant Kennedy’s investigative file, told the commission the same evidence pointed to a failure to act. “It was clearly a failure to act on her part,” Presley said when asked about his assessment of Byrd’s response.
Sergeant Philip Sweet, who was on scene and later reviewed the videos, said officers on the ground — including Byrd — indicated they could identify the general area from which shots were fired. Sweet recounted on the record that officers “could tell it came from this area,” referring to the pavilions and the center of the park.
What the board reviewed Major Smith described the investigative file as consisting of interviews (seven hours or more), call logs, radio traffic, body and dash cameras and GPS tracks. In his testimony he said the file was provided to board members roughly two weeks before the review board convened and that members were expected to review it before the meeting.
Board members told the commission they debated specific conduct by multiple officers who were on or near the scene when the shooting occurred. The board cleared Officer Riddle and Officer Pugh of the level of discipline that triggers review-board discipline recommendations (suspension, demotion or termination), citing factors that included their short tenure and how they responded. For Byrd, however, board members said they saw a pattern of actions and statements that together met the threshold for termination.
Evidence cited by the board and the chief - Body- and dash-camera timelines: Board members pointed to video showing Byrd activating a camera for a noncritical contact before the shooting and later deactivating vehicle recording as she left the parking lot where she had been stationed; the dash cam did not record her route to the park. Major Smith described the dash/body system as one that can backfill 30 seconds when a recording is triggered, and testified that Byrd’s dash cam was off for the bulk of her response route. - Vehicle operations and code-3 response: A Conway PD directive on emergency operations (code 3) requires an expeditious, direct response to life‑threatening calls using emergency equipment with “paramount consideration for the safety of the public and the assigned officers.” Major Smith and other board members said Byrd did not use lights and sirens and drove a longer route rather than taking nearer streets to reach the park; they contrasted that with Officer Riddle’s code‑3 response. - Truthfulness: The review board singled out statements in Byrd’s second interview by Lieutenant Kennedy that conflicted with video and radio evidence and with her own earlier on-scene comments. Major Smith testified the interview contained statements that could not be reconciled with the body‑camera footage and that the contradictions supported a finding of untruthfulness.
Board vote and chief decision Assistant Chief Welsh, Major Presley, Major Smith and Sergeant Sweet recommended termination; Major Lee Wood did not recommend discipline and did not vote for termination. Chief Harris reviewed the board’s recommendations and “ultimately determined that she had violated the six policies the review board agreed upon and did terminate her,” Major Smith testified. The record does not specify a public effective date for the termination.
Prosecutor concern and downstream effects During testimony Major Smith said prosecutors had raised concerns about using Byrd as a witness in at least one criminal case after the internal findings. He testified that prosecutors told him they were reluctant to put Byrd on the stand because the department would then be obligated to provide defense counsel with internal findings that could affect her credibility. Smith described that as a practical consequence of findings of untruthfulness.
Dissent and process notes Major Wood was the lone board member who declined to find policy violations or recommend termination; according to testimony he initially identified a single vehicle‑operations policy concern and later told the chief he changed his mind. Board members said Wood’s failure to provide an immediate recommendation created a long, awkward pause in the board meeting and that the chief met with Wood individually before concluding the board session.
Public reaction Witnesses and board members recounted that community members at a later vigil said officers had driven away from the scene; those public perceptions were part of the context for the inquiry. Board members said that perception — and the evidence showing the disparate responses of different officers — weighed in the deliberations.
What the board cited as policy violations Major Smith listed, and the board agreed on, the following policy areas the board found Byrd violated: untruthfulness (department truthfulness directive); conduct unbecoming; unsatisfactory performance (rules of conduct); body‑worn camera and dash‑camera requirements; emergency vehicle operations; and insubordination. The investigative file and the board record for each policy were entered into the administrative record during the hearing.
What the record does not establish The administrative record includes police directives cited at the hearing (body‑worn cameras, emergency operations, rules of conduct) and investigative materials that were reviewed by board members; the transcript does not record an internal‑affairs recommendation other than the board members’ votes and the chief’s termination decision. The termination’s effective date and any personnel‑file appeals or administrative‑law steps beyond the hearing transcript were not specified in the materials presented to the board during testimony.
Ending Board members told the commission their vote reflected the weight of the investigative materials and the potential risk to civilians and to fellow officers if an on‑scene supervisor does not act to stop ongoing, life‑threatening danger. “Untruthfulness is always a terminable offense,” Major Smith testified, and Major Presley summarized his assessment by saying the investigative evidence showed “a failure to act” that, in his view, made termination an appropriate outcome.
The department’s administrative materials entered into the hearing and the investigative exhibits are part of the public record of this hearing; Byrd’s legal representative and the city may file appeals, requests for records, or other administrative or civil actions that could affect next steps. The transcript record shows the department’s internal review board split over the sanctions, the chief accepted termination, and at least one board member publicly dissented from a finding of policy violations in the hearing record.

