Judge tosses lawsuit claiming Highway Patrol conspiracy

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit from a former Missouri State Highway Patrol sergeant claiming top ranks conspired against him for criticizing the patrol.

Judge Willie Epps made the ruling late Wednesday in favor of the Highway Patrol’s request for summary judgment in its favor. Epps ruled that while former sergeant Randy Henry’s comments were protected by the First Amendment, the patrol was warranted in punishing him for it.

Henry sued the patrol in 2016 after leaders demoted and transferred him based on comments he made surrounding the investigation into Brandon Ellingson’s drowning at the Lake of the Ozarks. Henry, a longtime water patrol trooper and supervisor, criticized the patrol for its training of road troopers transitioning onto the water, and claiming the special prosecutor involved in the Ellingson case had conflicts of interest.

Epps wrote that Henry’s comments were “of a public concern,” but caused an adverse effect on the patrol workplace. Two prosecutors, including the special prosecutor Amanda Grellner of Osage County, stopped taking cases Henry was involved in. Capt. Michael Turner, one of Henry’s supervisors, said Henry had become “radioactive.” A patrol disciplinary report found that he had violated three general orders of the patrol, saying that his behavior was “unbecoming” of a patrol employee.

Epps noted that courts give “considerable deference” to a government agency’s fear of disruption in the workplace when deciding to restrict speech.

“The MSHP is a government employer that relies substantially on working relationships among its members, other law enforcement agencies, prosecutors’ offices, and the judicial branch,” Epps wrote. “Trust, confidence and morale are expressly required in the MSHP, in no small part because its members rely on one another in life-threatening circumstances. The undisputed facts from the summary judgment record, coupled with reasonable predictions of future disruptions, provide sufficient evidence of disruption and damage to morale in the workplace.”

Henry declined to comment on the decision. Chet Pleban, attorney for Henry, did not return a request for comment on Thursday.

Epps also dismissed claims that Henry should be considered a “whistle-blower” in the Ellingson case. Henry spoke to several people about a possible conflict Grellner had in handling a case involving a patrol trooper. The patrol had previously investigated Grellner’s son in a 2012 rape case, but later ruled him out. Epps said his comments about Grellner’s possible conflict didn’t outweigh the patrol’s interest of maintaining order among its ranks.

“His allegations were largely unsupported by facts, and exposed no government corruption,” Epps said.

The Missouri State Highway Patrol released a statement in response to the ruling, saying the agency has state from the beginning there was no basis to Henry’s claims.

“Henry’s response to the tragic death of Brandon Ellingson included what the judge termed “spreading unverified conspiracy theories, being untruthful about it, and pressuring another individual to lie about it,” the patrol said. “In the judge’s own words, Henry “did not act as a whistle blower.” Now, two federal judges have ruled that there was no conspiracy by the Patrol.”