A REMARKABLE MEMOIR by a former Savannah-Chatham cop has become the hottest local read of the summer.
Black Sheep White Cop: Savannah EXPOsed, is grippingly written by Kevin Grogan, a former homicide detective whose local career spans five police chiefs, including now-imprisoned former Police Chief Willie Lovett.
Intriguingly, Grogan makes the case that Lovett was not only far from the most corrupt entity in local law enforcement, but that Lovett was basically railroaded by higher-ups.
He also puts forth a theory, backed with numbers, about why Savannah’s violent crime rate has skyrocketed over the past few years, since Lovett’s conviction.
The capitalization in the subtitle, “EXPOsed,” is a reference to the Expanded Patrol Operation team Grogan was a member of for most of 2006.
Known on the street for their bright yellow shirts and rapid response, EXPO made a name for itself with its combination of aggressive crimefighting tactics and the ability of its street-savvy officers to use their own discretion on the scene.
For example, EXPO officers might overlook a low-level drug offense or victimless crime in order to gain the trust of a community member who might later give them information helpful in apprehending a homicide suspect or drug kingpin.
“The Yellow Shirts established a hard but fair reputation during our brief existence,” Grogan writes. “It was known on the street that if EXPO had a reason to stop, the stop happened. But if the subject wasn’t wanted and wasn’t up to anything, the subject would be on his way shortly.”
With chapter titles like “Remember the Alamo, Motherfucker,” and “Smell The Gun, Leave the Crossandwich,” Grogan brings a cop’s typical dark, gritty sense of humor to the page. The book is available on Amazon and locally at E Shaver Booksellers, The Book Lady, and True Grits on River Street.
While his tale has many of the stock components of any police story—the nicknames, the camaraderie, the disdain for bureaucracy—what sets it apart is the skillful use of details and specificity.
Grogan doesn’t just recount an incident of chasing down a suspect, he’ll tell you on what lane and what cross street the foot race happened.
(Indeed, ever since reading the book I’ve wanted to go on a tour of the spots mentioned—which I suppose might be the biggest thumbs-up a reviewer could give.)
Specific high-profile local cases are mentioned: Jennifer Ross, Ricky Jivens, Amber DeLoach, Camoflauge, others.
He delves into local gangs like the HVP (Hitch Village Posse), VBS (Villa Boy Soldiers), and DPG (Dog Pound Gangstas).
EXPO, Grogan writes, operated to great effect directly under then-Interim Chief Willie Lovett. But then the team was suddenly shut down by new Chief Michael Berkow—perhaps because it was too effective and made everyone else look bad.
Grogan says EXPO’s drug interdiction duties were transferred to the Counter Narcotics Team, who Grogan paints as a clique of prima donnas who regularly claim credit for arrests they don’t make.
Grogan writes about EXPO team leader Sgt. Greg Capers, who right after being named Supervisor of the Year was reprimanded for not arresting a young man for having a small amount of marijuana:
“When I say small amount, it was barely enough for a stingy joint,” Grogan writes. “The kid was scared shitless and was not the target of the Operation, so Capers rubs out the weed and tells the kid to go home and be good to his mother. And for reasons none of us will ever understand, the Captain called Capers on the carpet and reprimanded him for dereliction of duty.”
Grogan says that in 2014, in the wake of various local and national controversies, including the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, SCMPD begins moving away from aggressively policing violent crime and becomes gradually more and more political, and therefore less effective.
Grogan says the numbers don’t lie:
• There was an immediate 24 percent decrease in homicides in the year that EXPO was in existence.
• In 2014, SCMPD made only 9,933 arrests compared to 12,333 the year before. The rate dropped again to 8,411 in 2015.
• “The decrease in arrests is directly tied to the increase in the number of murders in Savannah,” Grogan maintains. In 2014 there were 33 murders; in 2015, 58; and in 2016, 50.
The real mission statement of the book, however, comes when Grogan writes that “It is no secret that money talks and there are few places that I am aware of where it speaks louder than Savannah, Georgia, where justice is whatever you can afford.”
Even the cover of the book spotlights the stark difference between what the author calls “the two Savannahs”—black and white, rich and poor.
Whether it’s the selective outrage when a white person is murdered vs. an African American, or a police captain’s son caught with hard narcotics, or the massive and largely unaddressed poverty throughout the crime-ridden neighborhoods Grogan patrolled, the author has a keen grasp of the societal dynamics which make true justice particularly difficult to attain in Savannah.
In the end, the system itself is screwed from the top down. No episode shines more light on this than Grogan’s tale of his run-ins with Chatham County District Attorney Meg Heap, who he paints as largely ineffective and driven by politics.
In a particularly scathing passage in part about recent allegations against Alderman Tony Thomas, Grogan writes:
“Meg Heap became a master of deferring decisions to Grand Juries under the guise of remaining ‘impartial’ … I truly believe that Meg Heap would rather be viewed by the public as incompetent than to be on the wrong side of a political battle.”
Grogan also tells of his own DUI arrest which ended his law enforcement career.
While never shying away from responsibility for his actions, Grogan recounts the Kafkaesque experience of District Attorney Heap wanting him to testify as a witness against numerous homicide suspects, while also saying that Grogan, a U.S. Army veteran of Iraq, was no longer qualified to be a cop.
“It seems, therefore, that the District Attorney still thought I was a credible witness despite having accused me of being a felonious liar,” he writes.
The fact that so much of what Grogan writes about is very recent history in Savannah—to this day the stuff of news reports and newspaper columns—makes it a wild ride indeed, and a particularly gripping read.
This article appears in Jun 28 – Jul 4, 2017.
That was an awful joke, but anyhoo….Yeah no secret whatsoever that our former Mayor and police chief were total crooks (hints why Slick Willie is in prison) I’m sure something else will surface about the former Mayor and her gang of crooks. Correct me if i’m wrong but didn’t that weirdo Tony Thomas say something to City Council and the Mayor during his “censorship” or whatever they called it about the political corruption? Regardless already ordered this off amazon and looking foward to reading. Oh and D.A. Heap….what a joke. Well done again Jim.
I would characterize the book as highly opinionated and misleading in some areas. If you read it you get his take and opinion. For many who worked at SCMPD….we think differently. Below is what I had to say to the author and his reply, which can be found on the FaceBook page for the book.
“You should not honor men more than the truth.” Plato
Kevin,
You mentioned me in your dedication as a man who does not know the excuse of “Not my job” or “That is all I can do.” Perhaps that is true. You reference the “man in the arena” portion of a speech delivered by T. Roosevelt. Well I have stood in the ring, tasted the dirt and lost more of myself than most will ever know. Success has found me at times but not as often as failures. I think Roosevelt would allow me to be the critic.
I have given much thought to the theories and positions you take in your book. I have to say I am troubled by some things I read. Since you pulled my name into the public arena I feel compelled to offer my opinion. I feel the reader may be misled, and this is for those who might need more information to consider before making judgements.
(For those who do not know this law)
O.C.G.A. 16-10-20, False Statements and Writings
“A person who knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; makes a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or makes or uses any false writing or document, knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of state government or of the government of any county, city, or other political subdivision of this state shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years, or both.”
Sgt Larry, whom you hold in high regard, investigated your actions as a police officer (and yes while employed with SCMPD you are at all times a cop and a representative of the department) operating a police vehicle while intoxicated on July 17, 2014 and found you in violation of two SCMPD policies: Vehicle Operations and Oath of Office. That was for driving while under the influence of alcohol and the other for providing an untruthful statement. The untruthfulness was over a material fact, one that took some effort for the investigator to find (meaning he didn’t just take your word-he went out to verify your word and found evidence in contradiction).
Your statement was protected under “Garrity” (for the reader: immunity from use in criminal proceedings) unless you say something that is substantially not true. You complained you only had a month on administrative leave when others got up to a year before disciplinary action, but the department did not make you resign or terminate you at that point. You resigned the moment Sgt Larry wanted to confront the “misconstrued” information. The department ultimately assigned termination as your administrative punishment and noted your resignation in lieu of termination. Why resign? If you told it all, no hesitation, knowing you would be fired for the DUI anyway, why not make further statements to Sgt Larry? If there was a misunderstanding why not clear it up?
The book makes no mention of Sgt Larry’s findings, his testimony at trial or the disciplinary action of the department. Instead you attack the DA, the ADA’s, the citizens (grand jury members) and take a shot at a Superior Court Judge.
I’ll agree, five years earlier, under Lovett and that political climate, you most likely would never have been charged. The information might not have been brought to the attention of the DA’s office. At worst you would have been fired. It was hard to tell back then. Most of us could never understand why some officers were disciplined and others weren’t, but I guess that was just the “politics” of the former chief. Unfortunately for you, your misfortune came as the Lovett empire crumbled. Some of his skeletons escaped the closet. Matters involving officers were looked at more closely by the new Internal Affairs and perhaps that information was shared, reluctantly maybe, but shared nonetheless. Thus setting the new standard. You argue you were prosecuted because you were white and up until that time only former black SCMPD officers had been prosecuted. Does that mean your offense should have been ignored? Does that mean you are better than the other officers who did face and still face prosecution?
The citizens who sat on the Grand Jury at the time of your indictment did not indict a “ham sandwich.” They heard probable cause and voted based on their intellect. There is nothing sinister or unfair about the process of indictment in The State of Georgia and I am willing to go out on a limb and say the procedure will be similar in all 50 States.
Should the charge of false statements against you had been such that no reasonable person could have found you guilty, then your defense counsel would have asked for and convinced the presiding judge that a directed verdict of not guilty on the charge was necessary as a matter of law. There must have been more than just ham in the sandwich because that did not occur.
You complained the DA refused to prosecute a white gang for attacking a white police officer (off duty and not in uniform- don’t want anyone to think he was attacked in uniform) and insinuate there is some racial motivation or reason. What you fail to tell the reader is you had the case for over 12 months. You failed to make an arrest. You never completed your report until literally just prior to your resignation. You could have at any time sought a warrant and charged the perpetrator. This was our job. This was your job as the lead investigator- Investigate- If crime established charge appropriately- When arrests made submit ALL evidence and documents to DA’s Office for prosecution. The DA has discretion only over prosecution of the case, not your ability to arrest. I don’t understand what prevented you from arresting someone. Perhaps the more appropriate criticism for the failure of an arrest in this case should be directed towards SCMPD.
You praised a number of police officers and one former chief but bash a handful of prosecutors in the book. The reader should know not one of the prosecutors has ever been fired from their position or convicted of a crime while holding a position of public trust. Some of the cops you mention….4 were fired and found guilty of Federal Crimes. One if not two more were fired from SCMPD as well. Particularly that sergeant you seem so fond of who all too often was the focus of a domestic violence incident with even a couple of them actually reported to police. Your readers probably will not do this, but I encourage them to research the names themselves and make their own decisions on how much praise should be given to all the men in that unit. Without a doubt there were some very good men and officers that served on the unit. Also there is no doubt that proactive police work, such as done by EXPO, certainly has an effect on the crime statistics. Unfortunately it was the bad eggs and the clouds some members of EXPO carried with them at times that probably led to a lot of the dislike expressed by some in the police department towards EXPO while it was in existence.
You are a good man Kevin. You were a good cop. I absolutely understand the personal troubles that led to your terrible decisions. YOU made the choices that led to your tribulations. But for your choices, none of this would have occurred and if there is blame for all that occurred after the wreck I would look no further than yourself. I for some reason expected a little humbleness from you after this experience because I don’t see anything to be proud and boastful about. You had your trial, “stood before the mast” and the jury spoke. You escaped the serious charge and and no matter how anyone feels about the outcome, the entire process worked as it should.
You can dedicate this work in my name and others if you wish, but in no way do I support the glorification of some of the officers you named who have dishonored the badge and tarnished not only their names but the reputation of SCMPD. I do not support the various inferences you create through your portrayal of facts and information related to some of the investigations you reference. I do not support your position that everything you told Internal Affairs was truthful, and if I had been in Sgt Larry’s position I would have found you to have been untruthful as well. After all you gave no other reason or way for your “misconstrued” statement to be viewed in relation to the facts discovered.
Perhaps I don’t like hearing “not my job” and perhaps I don’t know how to think “there is nothing else I can do.” But the phrase I try to hold myself to the most is very simple. It brings all responsibility back to the one who speaks it. It forces self reflection…”No excuse sir.”
For anyone who reads this, most of what I write here can be verified with documentation if you are willing to do the work. Otherwise think what you will about some of the subject-matter in the book.
Author’s reply:
Alan, you too are a good man and there is no question you have been in the arena. I appreciate your criticism and have always admired your candor. Im troubled by a few of your takes on what I have written but I have always respected your ability to see the big picture. My accounts of the individuals in this book are based on my experience with them. I think glorify may be a strong word. As for my case and the interview, my opinion is well documented and I stand by it. For something to be criminal there has to be intent, I know you understand that all too well. The statute you quoted begins with knowingly and willfully. As far as making a second statement, I think my thinking is explained there as well and I hope you understand that was a time in my life where I was dealing with several issues. I appreciate your honesty as always. I also stand by my dedication because I have always admired your skill and tenacity. There is no one on this Earth who knows where the responsibility for my actions lays better than I. If you don’t see the agenda that underlies the entire prosecution then, as we have so many times before, we can agree to disagree. You have known me long enough also to understand that I own the mistakes I have made and make no excuse but I will not ever take responsibility for something I didn’t do.
While we are being so transparent Mr Sammons I believe that it is only fair to let the readers know that you currently work for the Chatham County DAs office
You are correct Tonya Toney. Prior to that I was with SCMPD for 12 years,to include while Kevin Grogan was there. I did not sling any mud. My questions are based in facts that you can easily check if you are so inclined. I posted what I typed to Kevin and what he typed in return so someone like yourself could see I am not hiding my thoughts from Kevin. He knows exactly who I am, where I worked then and now. Forgive me if I do not feel the need to list a resume and references to critique a published book. You and every reader of the book is entitled to your opinion. I simply expressed my thoughts and asked for answers to questions. I did not ask Kevin to place my name in the dedication of this book, and although there are things I can agree with, there are others I will not. That said, for people who never worked at SCMPD during this timeframe and those that do not know me either personally or professionally (and forgive me if I do not recognize your name and I apologize for my lack of memory if I should) it was in my personal interest to publicly express myself. By doing so my hope was to stop people’s assumptions that my name in a dedication implies blind support for the content of the book. Simply put Tonya Toney, had I not been dragged into a public publication my criticisms would have remained private as they had for years.
I’ve read within much of this mess concerning crime and mud slinging within Savannah. Most of this isi just negligence and ignorance, as to the cities enrichment through an ever-going system of crime, corruption poverty and disease. As i have noticed, coronors and police work as a team in covering up former murders. It makes me sick on my stomack to read trash in print aimed in the direction of half-witted mind bending for public consumption,
There is a widening gulf between What Savannah Is and What Savannah Thinks It Is and no journalist patrols that treacherous stream better than Jim Morekis. He takes on subjects that the newspaper of record is afraid to broach lest they offend some fat cat racist that advertises in what’s left of their publication. The last SMN investigative reporter, Lesley Conn, left years ago, never to be replaced. If I want the news or a reasoned commentary, I start with Morekis.
I’ve read the book and the preceding comments.
Maybe Mr. Sammons could enlighten us even further with a book of his own and Mr. Grogan could answer with another book. I believe it would make for a terrific Savannah Series and the citizens of Savannah would better understand the workings of their city.
Lololololol!!!!