LSP Lt. John Clary’s leave restored after bogus indictment dismissed, but will LSP conduct thorough investigation to uncover just how he was falsely accused and hold those responsible accountable?

Louisiana State Police (LSP) Lt. John Clary (left), along with his attorney, Kyle Green, prepare to depart from the Louisiana State Police Commission (LSPC) meeting of February 8, 2024 seconds after Clary’s leave was fully restored that he was forced to expend while defending a bogus indictment of December 15, 2022 in which he was falsely accused of, “concealing his body-worn camera video for almost two years.”

By now, we feel certain that no visitor to this site will even try to assert that we have not authoritatively and indisputably demonstrated that LSP Lt. John Clary was flat-out falsely accused of concealing his body-worn camera.  For that reason, we’re not going to rehash all that we have previously presented in the just-linked feature.

We submit that, because of Clary’s clear and unequivocal innocence of the indictment charge against him, Union Parish District Attorney John Belton had little choice but to dismiss the charge against Clary.  That indictment count alleged that Clary, in the aftermath of Ronald Greene’s arrest and in-custody death on May 10, 2019, “concealed his body-worn camera for almost two years.”

We’ve also asserted that Clary’s clear-cut innocence is what caused essentially no fanfare whatsoever when he was reinstated to LSP late last year.

On Thursday, February 8, 2024, we contend that it was again Clary’s innocence which prompted the LSPC to, expeditiously and without any discussion at all, reinstate all of the leave Clary had to burn through while he was pursued by Belton on the completely bogus indictment count.  Let’s take a look:

 2/8/24:  LSPC reinstates all of Clary’s leave which he had to burn through during Union Parish DA John Belton’s pursuit of a bogus indictment for, “concealing his body-worn camera for almost two years.”

While Clary got his leave restored because it never should have been required to have been used in the first place because the indictment never should have transpired, that in no way compensates Clary for all of the stress, public humiliation, and severe tarnishing of his reputation and good name which he endured from this irresponsible act on the part of several individuals who played key roles in causing this bogus indictment to even materialize.

The bigger question, therefore, in our minds at least, is whether LSP is going to launch a full, complete, and thorough investigation into what all transpired in April and May of 2021 that caused Clary and his family to endure this traumatic year in their lives?

During testimony before the Special Louisiana House Committee investigating the Death of Ronald Greene, on several occasions both former Lt. Col. and then-Chief of Staff Doug Cain as well as former Sergeant Albert Paxton were asked about the “Clary mistake,” as the whole incident came to allegedly be known among those with knowledge of the matter.  From our vantage point, which has included an extensive amount of time spent reading reports, reading emails, and watching in fine and excruciating detail testimony before that Greene Committee, the “mistake” made by LSP which most definitely needs fixing entailing policy going forward involves the following:

No investigating trooper should be permitted to author a report (be it original or supplemental) which directly points the finger at a fellow trooper accusing the trooper of an act which, if true, would constitute a criminal act, without that report being sent up the Chain of Command to include every single level of LSP Management for written sign off to include LSP’s Colonel on that report!  That report should not even be considered finalized until that final level of written, signed-off approval has been obtained!

In the now-highly-controversial supplemental report authored by then-Sergeant Albert Paxton, which is dated May 6, 2021 and references April 9, 2021 as being the first day Paxton obtained knowledge of the Clary body cam video (his subsequent testimony before the Greene Committee of March 22, 2022 indicating that he first learned of it on or around October 2, 2020 — which was corroborated by LSP’s then-use-of-force expert, Scott Davis — notwithstanding), we can note no other approval beyond Paxton’s supervisor, Johnny Brown.  The report indicates that Paxton electronically signed it on May 6, 2021 at 2:39 p.m., and Brown signed it on May 6, 2021 at 2:42 p.m.

We have reviewed and reported upon a high-profile past appointment by a former LSP Colonel which required SIX (6) layers of approval!  So, a relatively mundane appointment (although it turned out to be quite controversial and anything but mundane) has to be signed off by six successive levels of LSP Management, but a report directly accusing a trooper of an act which, if true, constitutes a criminal act, requires mere signing off by the trooper authoring the report’s supervisor?  That sounds like an absolutely stellar internal control system to us!  By requiring many more levels of Management to sign off on such a report, at a bare minimum, far more extensive collusion activities would be required at every level of LSP!

Are we saying that collusion took place in this matter?  We don’t think anyone is ever going to have the answer to that question unless and until the thorough and comprehensive investigation which we’ve called for on this whole matter is finalized!

Irrespective of whether any collusion did in fact transpire, we are willing to state that the rather matter-of-fact, coincidental, and actually haphazard manner in which Paxton is alleged to have first learned of the Clary video is itself suspect to us.  Now, recall that Davis (the one-time use-of-force LSP expert) accessed the Clary video on April 9, 2021 (beyond his downloading of it only five days after Clary uploaded it), which became the critical date Paxton claims that he first learned of the Clary body-cam video.  From the report:

On Friday, April 9, 2021, I was discussing the Ronald Greene in custody death case (IRS #19-5709) with Sgt. Scott Davis. Sgt. Davis is a use of force instructor at the LSP Training Academy and is responsible for reviewing videos and use of force reports to evaluate use of force incidents. I rely on Sgt. Davis’ knowledge and expertise when investigating use of force cases.

During our conversation, Sgt. Davis mentioned a phone call Lt. John Clary made to Capt. John Peters while Lt. Clary was on the Greene crime scene. Sgt. Davis began telling me about the conversation when I interrupted him asking, “What conversation”. He told me it was a conversation captured on Lt. Clary’s body camera. I told him I was not aware Lt. Clary had body camera footage of the incident and further told him, on the morning of the incident, May 10, 2019, Lt. Clary told me he did not have body camera video of the incident.

Perhaps Davis accessed the video that same date (April 9, 2021) to prove to Paxton that it existed; however, any decent auditor of any entity could not help but openly question if that access, combined with the manner in which Paxton asserted in the report that he first learned of the body camera video (and ESPECIALLY in light of the fact that word had been circulating around LSP that videos had been leaked to the media) was not a convenient means to try and fortify Paxton’s statement of how he initially uncovered the existence of the Clary body-worn camera video.

That is to say that, if, in accordance with their March 22, 2022 testimonies, the video was discussed between Paxton and Davis on or around October 2, 2020, and now a fear sets in that the media may publish the Clary video, perhaps a “scapegoat” may be needed for why Belton was not in possession of the video.  Davis accesses the video on April 9, 2021 to substantiate him indicating to Paxton that Clary had body-worn camera video so that neither of them could be blamed for the fact that Belton did not have it, nor had any effort whatsoever apparently been made between the dates of October 2, 2020 and April 9, 2021 to get that video in Belton’s hands!  The perfect “scapegoat?”:  Lt. John Clary!

At any rate, we find the above material in that Paxton supplemental report nothing short of astounding given that both Paxton and Davis testified on March 22, 2022 before the Greene Committee that they discussed the Clary body-worn camera video (per Paxton), “right around the time” of then-Master Trooper Chris Hollingsworth’s body-cam audio being leaked to the media wherein Hollingsworth tells a gentleman by the name of Chris White that, “I beat the ever-living f— out of him!”  That audio segment of Hollingsworth’s video contents  was published on October 2, 2020, which is  long before April 9, 2021 on any calendar that we’ve checked lately (189 days to be exact)!

What is immensely frustrating about all of this is that, IF higher levels of Management at LSP had been required to sign off on that report, it would seem that, before anyone risked destroying his or her own credibility in signing such a report, he or she would pick up the phone and call a few folk to check on the accuracy of what is in that report.

For example, if anyone had made a simple phone call to LSP Internal Affairs, someone in that Department should have been able to inform the caller (LSP higher level Management) that, “Clary did no such thing!  Sergeant Mike Talley viewed Lt. Clary’s body-worn camera in early September of 2020 in preparation for finalizing his internal affairs report dated October 20, 2020.  For that matter, so did Richard Buckland and Kevin Decote during the same timeframe as Talley viewed the video.”

Yeah, it would seem that adding a few more layers of LSP Management to be held accountable over all of this and those higher layers of Management making just a few phone calls could have caused the whole “Clary mistake” (as we define the “mistake,”) from ever transpiring, and it would most certainly have prevented it from escalating to the point that Clary actually got indicted by a Grand Jury!  That fact (that he got indicted on pure horse manure) still absolutely blows our minds!

Instead, what happened is that the report and some extensive notes associated with same were conveniently leaked to a major media outlet, and the “Clary mistake” took on a whole new life of its own which simply contained no resemblance whatsoever to the actual “Clary mistake,” which was a complete meltdown of LSP’s internal system to have stopped the false allegation against Clary from ever even being successfully lodged!  In that LSP meltdown, Clary was publicly tried in the media and declared “guilty” before even being able to utter a word to the contrary regarding his innocence.  We can only imagine the absolute frustration that must have entailed for Clary and his family and close friends.

In our minds, those parties who were responsible for the supplemental report and its contents are likely to be key prosecution witnesses when the trials of Union Parish Deputy Chris Harpin and LSP Trooper Kory York transpire.  We’ll only state that we would not want to be in Belton’s shoes (or should we say Hugo Holland’s shoes since he’ll be the one having to actually prosecute the cases) when it comes time for cross examination!

Also, entailing York, on January 31, 2024 the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeals Denied his Appeal of Judge Rogers’ Denial of his Motion to Quash.  Interestingly enough, it took the Second Circuit 2-1/2 months to issue the Denial and provide zilch in the way of explaining why the Writ was Denied.  We’ll see if that ends up being the final word on the matter; however, as we see it as a 100 percent certainty that York’s attorney, J. Michael Small, appeals that “blank denial” of the Second Circuit on to the Louisiana State Supreme Court.

At any rate, let’s hope that LSP does in fact learn a valuable lesson from this Clary disaster and keeps it from ever repeating itself because many lives endured much needless stress over this whole incident, but none any more than Lt. John Clary, who at least got a small level of vindication through the LSPC’s act depicted on the video above on February 8, 2024.


2 thoughts on “LSP Lt. John Clary’s leave restored after bogus indictment dismissed, but will LSP conduct thorough investigation to uncover just how he was falsely accused and hold those responsible accountable?”

  1. Just goes to show you what happens when you promote people in positions where they have no experience, I.e., never conducted any type of criminal investigation, to lead an investigative section. Past administrations made bad promotions and now the results are being exposed.

  2. There’s a simple way to fix the problems that I believe these District Attorneys keep getting State Police in trouble it’s seen in the video attached.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.