Jones v. St. Clair County: Key Deposition Questions

Analysis Legal Analysis

Part of Documented Incident

Deputy Marc King OWI Arrest and Cover-Up

November 6, 2022

View Full Incident

Overview

Critical questions arising from sworn testimony in the federal civil rights lawsuit. Why did the Sheriff not recuse? Why were texts deleted? What was discussed in command-level calls?

Analysis

Cross-Examination Issue Clusters

Key questions and issue clusters for legal proceedings or oversight hearings.


Cluster 1: Why No Recusal?

Core Question: Why did Mat King remain involved in a matter concerning his own brother?

Follow-up Questions:

  1. “When were you first notified of your brother’s arrest?”

  2. “At that moment, did you consider recusing yourself?”

  3. “What, if any, policy required you to recuse yourself?”

  4. “If no policy existed, why not?”

  5. “Do you believe you could be impartial in a matter involving your brother?”

  6. “If a citizen were in your position, would you expect them to step back?”

  7. “What actions, if any, did you take after being notified?”

  8. “Did you discuss the matter with anyone in your office?”

  9. “Did you give any direction regarding how the matter should be handled?”

  10. “Do you understand why the public might perceive this as a conflict of interest?”


Cluster 2: Why Deleted Texts?

Core Question: Why were text messages deleted, and what did they contain?

For Matthew Pohl :

  1. “Did you have text message communications regarding the November 2022 arrest?”

  2. “Do those messages still exist?”

  3. “If not, what happened to them?”

  4. “When were they deleted?”

  5. “Why were they deleted?”

  6. “Did anyone ask you to delete them?”

  7. “Were you aware at the time that they might be relevant to legal proceedings?”

  8. “What did the messages discuss?”

  9. “Who were the messages with?”

  10. “Do you understand that deleting evidence can create legal liability?”

For Damon Duva :

  1. “You testified that text messages are ’no longer available.’ What does that mean?”

  2. “Were they deleted?”

  3. “By whom?”

  4. “When?”

  5. “What was discussed in those messages?”

  6. “Did anyone instruct you to delete messages?”


Cluster 3: Why No Independent Investigation?

Core Question: Why was this matter not referred to an external agency?

Questions:

  1. “Is it standard practice to investigate internally when an officer is arrested?”

  2. “Are there circumstances that would trigger external investigation?”

  3. “Would a family relationship to command staff be such a circumstance?”

  4. “Why was Michigan State Police not contacted?”

  5. “Why was a neighboring sheriff’s office not contacted?”

  6. “Who made the decision to handle this internally?”

  7. “Were any alternatives considered?”

  8. “Do you have agreements with external agencies for such situations?”

  9. “If you do, why weren’t they invoked?”

  10. “Do you believe the internal handling was appropriate given the circumstances?”


Cluster 4: Pattern and Practice

Core Question: Is this an isolated incident or part of a pattern?

Questions:

  1. “How many times has a Sheriff’s Office employee been arrested in the past 10 years?”

  2. “In each case, how was the matter handled?”

  3. “Were any referred to external agencies?”

  4. “What is your policy for internal investigations?”

  5. “Have other conflicts of interest arisen?”

  6. “How were those handled?”

  7. “Has evidence ever been deleted in other matters?”


Cluster 5: Consequences and Reform

Core Question: What happens now?

Questions:

  1. “What consequences, if any, have resulted from these events?”

  2. “Have any policies been changed as a result?”

  3. “If not, why not?”

  4. “Will you commit to implementing recusal policies?”

  5. “Will you commit to evidence retention policies?”

  6. “Will you commit to external investigation requirements?”

  7. “What assurance can you provide that this won’t happen again?”


Strategic Notes

For each question cluster:

  • Start broad, then narrow
  • Get commitments on record
  • Follow up on inconsistencies
  • Document evasions or refusals
  • Compare testimony to documents

Key documents to reference:

Related Items

Tags

Legal Deposition Cross examination