Three Mt. Carmel Police Officers Indicted for Using Excessive Force, Violating Civil Rights

HARRISBURG - Former Lt. David Donkochik, Patrol Officer Jonathan McHugh, and Patrol Officer Kyle Schauer of the Mt. Carmel Borough Police Department have been indicted by a federal grand jury for charges related to using excessive force during arrests over a three-year period. The United States Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania made the announcement, marking a significant development in the case.

According to the indictment, the three officers are accused of conspiring to violate the civil rights of individuals they arrested between 2018 and 2021. The charges include allegations that they engaged in acts of excessive force, such as kicking, punching, choking, and inflicting bodily injuries on the arrestees in 22 separate incidents.

In an attempt to conceal their actions, Donkochik, McHugh, and Schauer took measures to prevent police cameras from capturing video footage of the arrests. If any incriminating footage was captured, they ensured it was not preserved. Additionally, the indictment alleges that the officers falsely reported that the arrestees posed a threat, justifying their use of violence. Subsequently, they charged the arrestees with aggravated assault, resisting arrest, and other related offenses to further conceal their own misconduct. The officers would also threaten arrestees with additional violence.

U.S. Attorney Gerard M. Karam emphasized the gravity of the officers' actions, stating, "The defendants violated the civil rights of numerous individuals in their community over an extended period and, in the course of doing so, betrayed the significant public trust placed in them." Karam affirmed the commitment of his office to hold those who abuse their positions accountable.

Jacqueline Maguire, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Philadelphia Division, expressed the FBI's dedication to ensuring justice in cases where individuals in positions of authority violate civil rights. She stated, "When someone wearing a badge abuses those powers and deprives another human being of their civil rights, the FBI and our partners will ensure that justice is brought to those who egregiously violate the public's trust."

Captain James Cuttitta of the Pennsylvania State Police, Bureau of Criminal Investigation, commended the joint efforts of the FBI and Pennsylvania State Police in their investigation. He expressed gratitude to the witnesses, residents, law enforcement departments, and county service agencies for their cooperation during the challenging and lengthy investigation. Cuttitta affirmed the commitment of the Pennsylvania State Police to thoroughly investigate cases of this nature statewide.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Carlo Marchioli and Michael Consiglio. If found guilty, the defendants could face a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment, supervised release, and a fine, as prescribed by federal law.

It is important to note that an indictment or criminal information represents accusations, and all individuals charged are presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law.

The investigation was conducted by the FBI and the Pennsylvania State Police, with support from various law enforcement agencies and county service agencies.

Note: For more information and updates on this case, please contact the United States Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

Citizen Review of Police: Approaches & Implementation

In many communities in the United States, residents participate to some degree in overseeing their local law enforcement agencies. The degree varies. The most active citizen oversight boards investigate allegations of police misconduct and recommend actions to the chief or sheriff. Other citizen boards review the findings of internal police investigations and recommend that the chief or sheriff approve or reject the findings. In still others, an auditor investigates the process by which the police or sheriff's department accept or investigate complaints and reports to the department and the public on the thoroughness and fairness of the process.

Citizen oversight systems, originally designed to temper police discretion in the
1950s, have steadily grown in number through the 1990s. But determining the
proper role has a troubled history. This publication is intended to help citizens, law enforcement officers and executives, union leaders, and public interest groups understand the advantages and disadvantages of various oversight systems and components.

In describing the operation of nine very different approaches to citizen oversight, the authors do not extol or disparage citizen oversight but rather try to help jurisdictions interested in creating a new or enhancing an existing oversight system by:

Describing the types of citizen oversight.

Presenting programmatic information from various jurisdictions with existing
citizen oversight systems.

Examining the social and monetary benefits and costs of different systems.

The report also addresses staffing; examines ways to resolve potential conflicts
between oversight bodies and police; and explores monitoring, evaluation, and
funding concerns. No one system works best for everyone. Communities must take responsibility for fashioning a system that fits their local situation and unique needs. Ultimately, the author notes, the talent, fairness, dedication, and flexibility of the key
participants are more important to the procedure's success than is the system's
structure.

READ ON
http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles1/nij/184430.txt