Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident asks Moorhead council to acknowledge conflicts, seek external review in 2009 death investigation
Summary
A Moorhead resident urged the city council to acknowledge alleged conflicts of interest tied to a 2009 death investigation and to support an external review, saying local relationships make impartial local oversight impossible.
Jeremy Laframboise told the Moorhead City Council he believes the city cannot objectively investigate his brother Joel’s 2009 death because people connected to the original investigation remain in local leadership and have personal relationships with current officials. Laframboise asked the council to acknowledge conflicts, have the councilman in question recuse himself from related matters and publicly support an independent external review if local review is not possible.
The request came during the public-comment portion of the meeting and focused on connections Laframboise identified among a former detective involved in the 2009 investigation, former Police Chief David Ebringer, and current officials. “You cannot be both judge and defendant,” Laframboise said, arguing the “appearance of impropriety alone demands external review.”
Mayor Shelley Carlson responded that the council does not conduct criminal investigations and said the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) would be the agency for an external criminal review; she noted the BCA had previously been involved in the case and said that fact makes a second BCA review unlikely. Carlson also said the city’s chief of police had reviewed Laframboise’s concerns and did not recommend further action. “Any investigations would be done internally and would be recommended by our chief of police,” Carlson said.
Laframboise told the council the meeting minutes for a June 23 session did not reflect the detailed testimony he provided and said the minutes reduced his statements to a single-line summary. He asked the council to either use its charter powers under section 2.1 to investigate or to publicly support a truly independent external review. He referenced “section 2.1 of the Minnesota charter chapter” in arguing the council has authority to investigate city affairs but noted the mayor had told him the mayor lacks administrative authority over police operations.
No formal motion or vote followed the public comment; the council provided procedural information to Laframboise about other complaint paths and directed him to outside bodies he could contact.
The council’s discussion distinguished between criminal investigation authority and the council’s administrative oversight. Carlson emphasized limits on the council’s role in criminal matters and reiterated alternatives Laframboise could pursue, including the Minnesota attorney general’s office of civil complaints and the Minnesota Association of County Attorneys.
