College Station Police Department Chief Scott McCollum faces Internal Affairs Complaint

An internal affairs complaint has been filed against College Station Police Department Chief Scott McCollum, alleging non-compliance with City of College Station/CSPD policy and due process violations. The complaint was filed by an anonymous complainant in February 2018 but was not processed by Chief McCollum in accordance with the department’s standard procedures for investigation and administrative adjudication of Internal Affairs complaints.

The complaint relates to the alleged criminal conduct of CSPD employee Christopher Brannan, who is accused of violating Texas Penal Code 37.08 False Report to Peace Officer or Law Enforcement Employee and Texas Penal Code 31.04 Theft of Service. The complainant alleges that Brannan’s conduct also violates CSPD policies relating to honesty and ethical standards outlined in Chapter 9 of the CSPD Policy Manual.

The due process and CSPD policy violations concerning the handling of the Internal Affairs complaint stem from two statements made by Chief McCollum in an April 12, 2018 letter concerning the disposition of Complaint #2018 EXT 001. The first statement indicates a failure to bifurcate the investigation of Penal Code and Policy violations as both DOJ standards and CSPD policy require. The second statement, quoting the County Attorney’s findings, does not logically align with prima facie facts.

The complainant specifically outlined several violations of Chapter 26 of the CSPD Policy Manual, which include:

1. Failure to Bifurcate: The complainant alleges that Chief McCollum failed to bifurcate the investigations of Christopher Brannan’s alleged violations of both CSPD policy and Texas Penal Code, as required by CSPD policy. Investigations of CSPD policy violations and criminal violations must be conducted independently.
2. Failure to Engage Unbiased Criminal Investigator: Due process requires that all complaints be investigated by conflict-free parties in an unbiased and impartial investigation. The complainant alleges that Chief McCollum engaged the County Attorney’s office to investigate criminal allegations against Brannan, which compromised the impartiality of the investigation.
3. Failure to Administer Polygraph Examination: The complainant alleges that Brannan was not compelled to submit to a polygraph examination focused on the statements he reportedly made to a CSPD detective in relation to a false criminal complaint he had filed to extort financial concessions from an innocent citizen. CSPD Policy Manual Chapter 26 10(a) states that an employee shall not normally be required to submit to a polygraph examination unless the complaining citizen first submits to such an examination. The complainant, the victim of Brannan’s malicious prosecution, submitted to and passed such an examination to disconfirm Brannan’s false statements.
4. Failure to Conduct Complete Investigation / Documentation: The complainant alleges that in both the criminal and administrative investigations, all relevant witnesses were not contacted, and all relevant documents were not sought. This failure to conduct a complete investigation/documentation is a violation of Chapter 26 of the CSPD Policy Manual.
5. Failure to Apply Proper Standards of Proof / Fair Adjudication: The complainant alleges that the correct standard of proof, i.e., “preponderance of evidence” for administrative and “beyond reasonable doubt” for criminal, was not applied in investigating, prosecuting, and adjudicating Brannan’s alleged administrative policy and criminal law violations.

At this time, there has been no official response from Chief Scott McCollum or the College Station Police Department regarding the complaint.

At this time, there has been no official response from Chief Scott McCollum or the College Station Police Department regarding the complaint.