The Department of Corrections hid evidence in use-of-force investigations, documents say

By DAMIEN FISHER, InDepthNH.org

There is not a single problem with the swift justice brought by Department of Corrections Commissioner Helen Hanks, Deputy Commissioner Paul Raymond, and Northern New Hampshire Correctional Facility Supervisor Corey Riendeau against Lt. Thomas Macholl for his alleged use of excessive force against an inmate.

According to documents obtained by InDepthNH.org, there are several.

Most strikingly, Raymond reportedly ordered a witness to remain silent about evidence that exonerated Macholl, and records show the witness was prevented from speaking to investigators for at least a month.

Now the Department of Corrections is ignoring an order from the Personnel Appeals Board to reinstate Macholl and is instead appealing the decision. Macholl told InDepthNH.org he was ready to fight the government that tried to end his career and put him in prison.

“I never stood up for bullies or anything like that,” Macholl said.

Macholl, a former Connecticut State Trooper and 2016 Correctional Officer of the Year, is also a leader in the correctional officers union.

DOC officials declined to directly answer questions about Macholl’s termination but referred the appeal the department filed with the New Hampshire Personnel Appeals Board. It rejects the findings of the PAB and the findings of investigators from the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office.

On April 27 last year, Macholl used a pressure technique known as jaw pressure point on a passenger in a van who behaved in a violent and disruptive manner. Macholl managed to get the inmate to comply and he was able to safely escape the van to a secure cell. Six hours later, Macholl wrote his report on the use of printing technology.

He was fired on May 8, 2023 and the termination was soon reported to the New Hampshire Police Standards and Training Council. Additionally, DOC Commissioner Helen Hanks sent a letter to New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella asking the Public Integrity Unit to open a criminal investigation.

All of this occurred before the DOC concluded its use of force investigation against Macholl on May 22, 2023.

“This is not just an employment matter, they tried to prosecute me,” Macholl said. “It’s absurd what they did to me. I have no other discipline on my record.”

According to Macholl, within hours of completing his report, the department began planning to get rid of him. Riendeau told Macholl on April 28, 2023, before the DOC’s use of force investigation even began, that he planned to fire him for illegally restraining the inmate in a chokehold, Macholl said.

Riendeau did not witness the incident, but instead cited security videos from the previous day. Macholl explained to Riendeau that while a pressure point in the jaw may appear like a chokehold to a civilian, the pressure is not applied to the neck or windpipe and the person is not in danger.

Considered the lowest level of force by law enforcement, pressure points are used to inflict pain on nerve centers without causing permanent damage or injury. Macholl said the only way pressure points are effective for officers is to relieve the pain as soon as the subject complies, meaning the pain is released for seconds.

“I’ve been doing this for 30 years,” Macholl said.

Riendeau waited until May 8, 2023 to fire Macholl instead, citing excessive use of force. However, according to the New Hampshire Attorney General Public Integrity Unit report, witnesses, including other inmates, told the DOC’s internal investigator on May 4, 2023 that Macholl did not use a chokehold or any other excessive form of force against the inmate.

In fact, on April 28, 2023, Raymond knew that what Macholl was doing was not a chokehold, according to reports from Public Integrity Unit investigators. It is not standard procedure for the deputy commissioner to participate in a use-of-force investigation, Macholl said. But on April 28, 2023, Raymond called Captain Scott Towers into his office to review the surveillance video. The DOC later attempted to conceal that this meeting between Tower and Raymond ever took place.

From the Public Integrity Unit report: “PIU investigators find it troubling that within a day of the incident, DOC Deputy Commissioner Raymond specifically asked Captain Towers to review the video footage and provide a professional/expert opinion.” Captain Towers is Arguably one of the most qualified NHDOC members based on his training and experience to provide such a statement in a use-of-force incident. Captain Towers believed the video did not demonstrate the use of a chokehold, but when he asked Assistant Commissioner Raymond if he wanted to document it, he was told no. Therefore, there is no reference in the file to this information, which undoubtedly has an exculpatory character. Captain Towers also believed that the use of force review should be conducted by someone independent of the DOC, such as the Conduct Review Committee. “

During the PIU investigation, Towers was reportedly not allowed to speak to investigators.

“Captain Towers had to resolve such requests through the Commissioner’s Office, specifically Michael Todd, Director of Professional Standards. During his interview with PIU investigators, Captain Towers expressed frustration that approval to speak with PIU investigators took so long (almost a month) and that he had to contact DOC leadership several times However, he did not “want to give the Attorney General’s Office the impression that he himself was hesitant and/or uncooperative for some reason,” the report said.

Both the PIU investigators and later the PAB members found this meeting between Towers and Raymond devastating. According to the report, Raymond Towers did not show the entire video of the incident during the April 28, 2023 meeting. When the video was shown from two additional angles, Towers told PIU investigators that his opinion of the force was stronger.

“Captain. Towers stated that after reviewing the video footage with DOJ investigators, his opinion not only remained the same as when interviewed by AC Raymond, but was further supported by the additional video footage he reviewed during that interview became. “In his opinion, Lieutenant Macholl did not use a chokehold on the subject, but rather a pressure point technique (mandibular angle) that requires a certain degree of upper body/head stabilization,” the report states.

The PIU investigation ended in November and concluded that no criminal charges would be appropriate against Macholl. This spring, the PAB found the DOC’s attempt to silence Towers disturbing and said there was no evidence that Macholl used excessive force.

But Macholl’s firing is based on the alleged illegal use of force and his failure to properly engage the inmate in the suicide prevention program. Macholl told InDepthNH.org that the inmate was not actually suicidal but was using the program to avoid being sent to another prison.

The inmate was scheduled to be transferred to the Concord prison after being accused of assault in the Berlin prison. The inmate had caused trouble for staff in the days before the April 27, 2023 incident and found ways to remain in Berlin. Macholl told InDepthNH.org that he had a good relationship with the inmate and had spoken to him the night before about the upcoming transport. Macholl said the inmate needed to go to Concord, but the inmate signaled he would game the system to stay in Berlin.

“I told him he had to get down there, but he said, ‘I’ll just commit suicide again,'” Macholl said.

In the van, the passenger began screaming “suicide” at 5 a.m. and banged his head against the wall of the vehicle. The diver told Macholl that he could not take the inmate to Concord, and Macholl went in to get him out.

“You got your way, we’re taking you back outside,” Macholl told the inmate.

But the occupant continued to behave violently and now refused to get out of the van. Macholl then used the pressure point to get the occupant out of the vehicle. He then placed the inmate in a cell and had staff check on him every 15 minutes using a “behavior monitor.”

The DOC used this as another reason to fire Macholl. According to the termination, Macholl violated policy by failing to formally place the inmate on suicide watch. Macholl’s answer is that the inmate was not suicidal, but was just faking it so as not to have to leave Berlin.

Even though the inmate was suicidal, the PAB determined that Macholl’s failure to utilize the suicide prevention system did not constitute grounds for termination. According to PAB, the DOC should have at most suspended him for the violation.

“The incident in question should have been handled differently, but the board concluded it was appropriate for someone with Lt. Macholl’s experience and performance should have been viewed as a ‘teachable moment’ and not as a basis for immediate termination,” the PAB ruled.

Instead of putting Macholl back on the job with back pay, the DOC’s appeal seeks a full hearing on the matter. The appeal disputes large portions of the PIU report and even claims that Towers is not a use-of-force expert. The PAB has yet to decide on the appeal.