Opinion ID: 2782925
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: AUSA Morehead’s Account

Text: AUSA Morehead’s testimony indicated that she had not taken any initiative regarding Plaintiff. She said that Roland called her to ask if there was a federal court opinion involving Plaintiff. Morehead replied that there was; and on June 29, 2009 (three 9 weeks after Plaintiff was removed from investigations), she emailed the Elam order to him with the message about Plaintiff’s “bungling” investigations. Aplt. App., Vol. V at 1188. Morehead did not recall speaking with anyone else at the WCSD before speaking with Roland and did not know why he had called her. Morehead did say, however, that in 2009 she conducted a series of lawenforcement training sessions with the DA’s office, including Gorman. The subject of the training was testifying in court. During these sessions she identified Plaintiff by name and used the Elam order to illustrate how an officer can develop a Giglio problem.