Colbert Police Department's Sketchy Past: Misconduct, Hate Groups, and Moral Turpitude
Use of Force Investigation May Be Tip of the Iceberg
In July 2023, the Colbert City Council terminated police Chief David Petersen for “undisclosed reasons”. KXII reported that when he was hired, the city knew that he had been fired from Pushmataha County Sheriff’s office.
His termination from Pushmataha County Sheriff’s office was allegedly for using his county vehicle for personal use, and in a separate incident, Petersen allegedly caused an Antlers police officer to chase him. As the officer was pursuing Petersen, who was responding to a call in his personal vehicle, the officer crashed and his patrol vehicle was totaled.
It was also reported that Petersen was arrested in 2011 for embezzlement after admitting to the theft of a laptop, toys and food from a Walmart he worked at. Charges were later dismissed.
In 2017, Petersen brought controversial attention to Colbert when photos of him posing inappropriately with young females made the rounds on social media.
Although the Brady List may not contain a large number of entries for the Colbert Police Department, the few known incidents are concerning in their own right.
Aside from former “Chief” David Petersen, the city of Colbert has also previously employed Bart Alsbrook who is believed to have maintained connections with a white supremacy hate group with connections to mail bombings in the 1990s and who was also found to have participated in the production and sales of racist hate media. It is rumored he now works as a Bryan County Sheriff “Investigator”.
The city of Colbert also previously employed Frank Burrola, who settled with the city in a wrongful termination suit where the city of Colbert claimed he failed to properly submit his time sheets. Due to the suit being settled out of court, there will never be a finding of fact related to potential time theft [a crime of moral turpitude] that could easily be considered a “brady offense” if found to have occurred.
Coincidentally, in 2022, Burrola would receive a public use of force and deprivation of rights complaint [on the #Bradylist] after the video below surfaced.
Burrola continues to enjoy a high ranking position with the Bryan County Sheriff’s Office.
The District Attorney’s Responsibility is Not Over!
Kuddos, to District 19 Attorney, Tim Webster, for requesting an investigation. Many DAs in other districts would [and have] looked the other way. This is a step in the right direction, but it is also time for him to follow through and complete his ethical and constitutional obligations.
The latest news article, declaring that Bryan County District Attorney, Tim Webster, requested an OSBI investigation into uses of force by the Colbert Police Department, is important information for every criminal defendant who’s case involves any Colbert police officer. Although the article did not identify the officer(s) subject to investigation, it is clear that the District Attorney is aware of potential impeachment evidence that must be disclosed to every defendant who’s case the evidence may be material to. Important to note, is that materiality is not subject to the discretion of Mr. Webster, but of the defense. He holds a constitutional obligation to disclose to all defendants in cases that will include any of the officer(s) under investigation. It is then up to their attorneys to determine if the PID [potential impeachment evidence] is material to their client’s defense. The duty to disclose exculpatory evidence is not just a legal obligation; it is a moral imperative to ensure a fair trial for the accused. The obligation is also reflected in [special duties of a prosecutor] ORPC 3.8(d) to disclose all “mitigating” evidence. Questionable uses of force, patterns of police policy and conduct, fall squarely within these parameters.
Aside from District Attorney Webster’s obligation to disclose, he is now presented with an opportunity to promote trust with the community by demonstrating accountability through the review of Colbert cases and proactive disclosure. It would be a refreshing and welcomed step towards showing his client [the public] that he is adequately representing our interests and the public’s desire to hold fair and impartial trials.
Bryan County could take the lead in Oklahoma and begin to model transparency similar to many jurisdictions in other states, by simply filing an affidavit in cases where brady and giglio disclosures are made. Such a simple step would illustrate to the public that Oklahoma has a prosecutor who believes in upholding the Constitution, due process, transparency and fair trials. Time will tell.
What Colbert Defendants Can Do?
*The following information is for educational purposes ONLY. It is NOT legal advice.*
Defendants who believe their case may be subject to disclosure of information related to the Colbert police use of force investigation should speak with their attorney about what relief they are entitled to. Specific requests for discovery, post-conviction relief, and many other motions and/or pleadings could potentially be relevant to a Colbert defendant’s case, now, that were not previously. It would be up to an attorney to properly assess the needs and opportunities this new revelation presents to their client, as every case is unique.