Opinion ID: 2716913
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Testimony of Walter Whitman

Text: The next witness, Walter Whitman, a former warden at the DOC, also served on the 2002 panel. At the time of trial he had retired from the DOC. He testified that all candidates for promotion were asked the same questions and that knowledge of departmental policies and procedures was the most important criterion assessed at the interview. He also corroborated Ms. Getter’s testimony that plaintiff arrived at the 2002 interview in his military uniform and suggested to the panel that, in view of federal law, his active military status should “have a positive impact on his candidacy for promotion.” Mr. Whitman testified that, during the interview he concluded that plaintiff’s knowledge of policies and procedures was “average.” He further testified that plaintiff’s military leave status did not factor into the score he gave plaintiff on any of the questions. He also stated in his testimony, however, that he told plaintiff at the interview that plaintiff’s availability would have an impact and that plaintiff “may want to consider that before he [reached] the next level of interview[s].” Mr. Whitman further testified that availability would have an impact if he were making the decision because “practical matters” had to be taken into account; he acknowledged that he believed that holding a position 13 A “spork” is defined as “[a]n eating utensil having a spoonlike bowl and tines.” The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1692 (5th ed. 2011). - 11 - vacant for someone on leave would not be a “good management decision.” Mr. Whitman also stated that plaintiff’s military status would not be looked upon unfavorably, but he also stated that “there’s an operational consideration. His unavailability would have had an impact on his candidacy.” It is noteworthy, however, that the score recorded by Mr. Whitman was the highest score that plaintiff received from the members of the 2002 interview panel.