Cell phones searches, a psychic, a widow whose husband may or may not have committed suicide and a witness who never showed up lead the highlights of the first day of testimony in an arbitration hearing in the case of former Port Arthur Police Det. Mickey Sterling.

Bettye Lynn of Lynn Ross and Gannaway LLP is representing the city of Port Arthur in the case while Bob Thomas, an attorney with the Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas, is representing Sterling in the case that is being overseen by arbitrator Don. B. Hayes of Sherman, Texas.

He is one of five officers placed on administrative leave earlier this year. He was later fired from the department.

 

Port Arthur Police Det. Elie Van Horn filed a Whistleblower suit against Sterling and four other officers for alleged issues ranging from obstruction of justice or retaliation and misuse of official information to official oppression.

Much of the information presented on Tuesday centered around Det. Scott Gaspard — another officer who was placed on administrative leave earlier in the year and who has since retired and his ties to Sterling.

That’s where the cell phones searches, a psychic, a widow whose husband may or may not have committed suicide came into play.

In April 2015, Joseph Gauthier’s truck was found atop the Rainbow Bridge, his shoes set aside. His disappearance was initially labeled a suicide but his body was never located even after searches by the U.S. Coast Guard, Texas Equusearch and a private investigator.

Carol Gauthier never gave up hope that he would be found. Not wanting to believe he committed suicide she began calling police in hopes of an investigation and closure. She was told by officers they were 99.99 percent sure he had committed suicide and his body was hung up under the water somewhere.

She contended in the hearing that her weekly calls and some time visits to the department were shrugged off, going so far as to say “she heard that Sterling placed sticky notes on police phones listing all of the numbers she had called from” thus warning officers of her repeated calls.

Gauthier said a self-proclaimed psychic, Karen Jannise, wanting to help contacted her almost a year after her husband’s disappearance. She met with her and Gaspard and she alleges the cop and the psychic passed a cell phone back and forth and giggled like children, hinting at an alleged extramarital affair between them.

Gauthier went on to make the connection in her testimony between Gaspard and Sterling’s reported alleged wrongdoing.

Sterling, she said, had been dating a woman named Angela Ashcraft. Ashcraft reportedly broke up with Sterling claiming he was “crooked,” according to Gauthier. And Ashcraft, not wanting to be involved in an investigation into Joseph Gauthier’s disappearance, worried that her name was in Gauthier’s phone.

According to Gauthier, Gaspard demanded a search be done on Gauthier’s phone under the pretense that she possessed child pornography.

The cell phone forensic search was also, Gautier said, to look for information showing that Gaspard and Jannise were involved in a relationship.

No child porn was found on Gautier’s phone.

“The extraction of data from Carol Gauthier’s phone and examination of that data revealed to me, something was definitely wrong, definitely not right in that investigation,” Van Horn said during his testimony.

The arbitrator questioned Lynn saying “counsel, I hope your case is not based on hearsay upon hearsay.”

Lynn explained that Ashcraft had been subpoenaed to be called as a witness but did not show up, thus causing her to use Gauthier’s second and third hand knowledge of some of the events.

Thomas, during cross examination, asked Gauthier whether Sterling was present at her home when the search warrant was executed — she answered ‘no.’

Tom Barbee, a CLEAT field representative, said the arbitration is scheduled to be held over the next two days but is expected to go on longer.

If this happens then another three day block will be scheduled to complete the hearing.

Unlike a criminal trial, the results of the arbitration hearing will not be known immediately. The attorneys have the option of closing arguments or a brief and if they choose to present a brief, they have 30 days to submit the information. Then there is a 30-day period for the arbitrator to render a decision.

The arbitrator’s decision is binding and not subject to an appeal.