Wayne County ethics board reviews complaint alleging deputy used sheriff’s uniform to influence custody dispute; board narrows scope and seeks testimony

The Wayne County Ethics Board on Oct. 12 reviewed a complaint from a resident identified in meeting materials as Ms. McGrew alleging Deputy Derek Anderson used his Wayne County sheriff’s uniform and apparent official influence to intimidate her and others in a private child-custody dispute.

Attorney Longstreet, presenting the complaint, said the board received sworn affidavits, videos and witness statements and that one incident—on or about July 30–31, 2020—appeared to fall within the board’s ethics ordinance prohibition on using county personnel or property to advance private interests. “It is my recommendation at this time that the board send this matter to the Wayne County Sheriff’s Office internal affairs division for further investigation,” Attorney Longstreet told the board.

The board debated how broadly to consider the materials. Longstreet told members that multiple incidents were asserted in the complaint but that only a single encounter in which the deputy visited an apartment complex in uniform appeared to clearly implicate the ethics code provision cited by counsel. Longstreet also summarized material submitted by the parties, including an affidavit from an apartment manager, videos and court-related documents produced to the board.

Several board members said they found the overall pattern of texts, videos and messages “alarming” and urged taking action to protect possible victims and to clarify jurisdictional limits. Mary Parisian, assistant commission counsel, told the board the proposed ethics-ordinance amendments—previously under review by county commissioners and referenced elsewhere in the meeting—had seen little movement: “There really hasn’t been much movement,” Parisian said when asked for an update.

Members debated whether the board should immediately refer the matter to the sheriff’s internal affairs unit or first hear testimony from the complainant to narrow the scope of issues under the board’s jurisdiction. Board members noted the panel’s jurisdiction focuses on actions taken in an official capacity or through use of county property or influence; matters alleged to have occurred in a private capacity may fall outside the ethics code.

A motion to consider the record, obtain testimony from the complainant focused on alleged uses of official status or county property, and narrow the inquiry to conduct related to the deputy’s capacity with the sheriff’s department carried without recorded opposition. The board recorded unanimous voice approval, with no recorded dissents. Attorney Longstreet’s recommendation that the sheriff’s office internal affairs investigate was noted on the record.

Separately, the board received a brief status update on proposed amendments to the Wayne County ethics ordinance that counsel said would add investigative powers, subpoena authority and rules for disqualification or removal of members. Counsel said the proposed amendments remained in review by county commissioners and that no final action had been reported to the board.

The board also approved a separate motion giving the chair authority to change meeting dates and times unilaterally when necessary; that motion was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote. The meeting ended after routine items and adjournment was voted on and approved.

Votes at a glance: the board approved approval of the meeting minutes; approved a motion to obtain narrowed testimony and consider evidence related to Ms. McGrew’s complaint (motion carried, no recorded opposition); approved granting the chair authority to change meeting dates/times (motion carried); and the meeting adjourned by voice vote.

The board did not take a formal recorded vote to refer the complaint directly to the sheriff’s internal affairs division; that referral was recommended by Attorney Longstreet and documented in the meeting record for the board’s consideration and potential follow-up.