What Should Have Happened
- Sheriff should have immediately recused himself upon learning of brother's arrest
- An independent external agency should have been engaged to investigate
- All communications should have been documented and preserved
- Officers without personal relationships should have handled post-arrest procedures
What Actually Happened
- Sheriff Mat King did not recuse himself from any aspect of the matter
- No external agency was engaged; matter handled entirely internally
- Text messages were deleted by multiple parties
- Close friends of arrestee were directly involved in handling the incident
People Involved
Event Details
Incident Summary
On November 6, 2022, at approximately 1:30 a.m., Marc King of the St. Clair County Sheriff’s Office was arrested for Operating While Intoxicated (OWI). This arrest set in motion a series of events that would expose systemic governance failures within the department.
What Happened
The Arrest
- Marc King was arrested for drunk driving while off-duty at approximately 1:30 a.m.
- Blood alcohol tests administered at 2:04 a.m. and 2:06 a.m. showed a BAC of .18
- He was transported to Lapeer County Jail (notably, not St. Clair County)
- George Clark was the arresting officer
- Joe Schoof and April Seavolt were at the arrest scene
- Scott Jones was the on-scene supervisor
Immediate Aftermath
- Mat King (the arrestee’s brother) was notified the same day
- The Sheriff contacted Matthew Pohl and Jim Spadafore
- Command-level calls were made regarding the incident
The Problem
The issue is not that a deputy was arrested. Law enforcement officers can make mistakes like anyone else.
The issue is what happened next:
- Mat King did not recuse himself despite being the arrestee’s brother
- No independent investigation was initiated
- No external agency was engaged to handle the matter
- Close friends of the arrestee were involved in the internal handling
- Text messages were later deleted by multiple parties involved
Why This Matters
When a law enforcement officer is accused of wrongdoing, public trust depends on an independent, transparent investigation. In this case:
- The top law enforcement official in the county had a direct family relationship with the subject
- No safeguards were activated to ensure independence
- The appearance of favoritism undermines public confidence in all department actions
Key Questions
- Why was no external agency engaged to investigate?
- Why did the Sheriff not recuse himself?
- What communications occurred that were later deleted?
- What was the outcome of any internal investigation?