Ex-officer’s personnel file adds insights

The personnel file of former Columbus Police Sgt. Paul Caraway provides additional details on what was known about him by city and county officials prior to his being hired by the city of Columbus and what was known prior to several incidents in 2015 that led to his termination.
Following a state criminal investigation, Caraway, 56, was terminated by Mayor Gary Woltermann on Nov. 19, 2015 on charges of misconduct and dereliction of duty.
In addition to allegations of sexual assault reported by a 911 dispatcher, Caraway also admitted to Police Chief Bill Pronovost that he had met with a woman at Itch-Kep-Pe Park on several occasions for an hour or more while on duty, City Attorney Doug Howard said at the time.
The dispatcher filed a complaint over Caraway’s alleged misconduct with the Montana Department of Labor and Industry’s Human Rights Bureau, citing the Stillwater County Sheriff’s Office, Sheriff Cliff Brophy, the Columbus Police Department and Pronovost as respondents. She is represented by Nate McConnell of Missoula.
The Human Rights Bureau has six months to investigate the dispatcher’s complaint and determine if it should be taken to a contested hearing. The complaint against the county was filed Sept. 17, and the complaint against the city was filed Nov. 19.
Stillwater County is being represented in the dispatcher’s complaint by Montana Association of Counties Managing Defense Counsel Gregory Bonilla. He denied most of the allegations in his response.
The city of Columbus is represented by Michele Braukmann of Billings, Howard said. He said he had no comments to make on the case while it was still under investigation. The city has denied the allegations.
Background checks
Caraway started work at the Stillwater County Sheriff’s Office in August 1990 after working for the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics in 1982-1987 and the Montana Criminal Investigations Bureau in 1987-1990.
He applied for a job with the Columbus Police Department on Jan. 24, 2008. A handwritten note by a member of the Columbus Police Commission at the top of his application form states that Caraway “looks very good” but there was a “question if Paul could still work well” with the sheriff’s office. No reason was provided for that question.
Caraway scored well on the Feb. 7, 2008 oral interview conducted by six city and county officials. Sheriff Brophy, who had been his boss for the past 18 years, gave Caraway 30 out of 55 possible points, noting that Caraway was “brief with officers and dispatch,” in terms of working efficiently. Brophy provided Caraway a 2-point bonus, saying Caraway was “honest, dedicated, community oriented, professional, always available for backup.”
Chief Pronovost gave Caraway 39 points. That same day, he also wrote down a list of rules he expected Caraway to follow, including “not make sexual innuendos to any person.” Item four states, “I am not like 32-1. I will discipline up to and including dismissal.” Sheriff Brophy’s call number is 32-1. Pronovost told the News this week that he informed Caraway of these rules.
A few days later, in a Feb. 11, 2008 background investigation memo, Pronovost referred to Caraway’s past work in the sheriff’s office.
“Over the past one and half years, I have heard numerous things about Paul Caraway from different people,” Pronovost said. “The sheriff does not appear to have any respect for Paul because of an incident which happened several years ago. I know he would not hire Paul for the job.” Pronovost did not describe the nature of the “incident” in the memo.
Columbus Police Sgt. Gary Timm also wrote a background investigation memo on Caraway, in which he went into detail about a 2007 incident while Caraway was a sheriff’s deputy.
“As I have discussed with you in the past, there have been questions raised about his behavior around some females,” Timm wrote. “[A female dispatcher] was asked about his behavior, and she stated that on one occasion Paul threw a packet of ketchup down her shirt and the back of her pants. She said she has not had any other incidents. I don’t think [the two other female dispatchers] have had any issues, but don’t want to indulge any farther into those reasons.”
This same 2007 incident was cited in detail in the dispatcher’s 2015 Human Rights Bureau complaint. Chief Pronovost addressed the incident in a statement to the News this week.
“I was made aware of the incident involving throwing ketchup packets down a female’s shirt,” Pronovost said. “Given the circumstances, I don’t believe that rises to the level of sexual harassment, and I still don’t believe that would be considered sexual harassment. As far as any documented cases of prior sexual harassment, I was not aware of any.”
Complaints and
reprimands
Caraway was hired by the city of Columbus and started work in March 2008. His annual job performance reviews for the next seven years were mostly positive, and he was promoted to sergeant on Feb. 23, 2011.
But within Caraway’s Columbus Police Department personnel file are several reports and complaints about his behavior brought by civilians and law enforcement personnel – including incidents involving the same female dispatcher from the 2007 incident.
On Nov. 9, 2009, less than two years after Caraway was hired, Chief Pronovost wrote a memo to Caraway describing areas where he needed improvement.
“As you are aware, I have had two separate complaints of comments made by you or females who you make uneasy,” Pronovost said. “You need to work on your approach to people, primarily females. This is a highly sensitive area, but you need to be aware that you do make some citizens feel inferior or uneasy when they are around you.”
Three days later, on Nov. 12, 2009, Sgt. Timm wrote a memo to Pronovost reporting that Caraway “is spending time in dispatch and making inappropriate comments sexual in nature.”
The 911 dispatchers held a meeting, Timm said, and Sheriff Brophy “told the dispatchers that it is up to each dispatcher to allow or not allow officers in their office. He said he can only control his deputies, but not the city officers.”
Timm noted that one dispatcher – the woman who filed the Human Right Bureau complaint – had told him that two other female dispatchers “had concerns with Paul’s comments.” Timm also said he was present in the police department weight room when Caraway made an inappropriate sexual remark to the dispatcher.
“This has been a common problem with Paul, and was a concern of mine prior to his employment with the city,” Timm said.
Caraway replaced Timm as sergeant in 2011, and Timm now works as a patrol officer.
Chief Pronovost summoned Caraway to his office as soon as he received Timm’s report and gave him a verbal warning “that this was to cease immediately.”
About a month later, on Dec. 14, 2009, Pronovost sent a memo to Caraway reporting concerns by employees at a local casino about his behavior. Pronovost said two female employees had told Sgt. Timm that they didn’t want Caraway to conduct an upcoming robbery class “because they felt uncomfortable around you.”
The manager at the local casino “explained that you made her feel inferior and that you were ‘God’s gift to females,’” Pronovost said.
About a month later, on Jan. 4, 2010, Caraway complained to Chief Pronovost hat the same female dispatcher from the 2007 incident had failed to generate a call for service for two separate incidents in which Caraway initially was asked to respond.
But 11 months later, on Dec. 22, 2010, Chief Pronovost sent a memo to Caraway citing two complaints that had been made against him – including that he had refused to handle a call made by the same dispatcher.
Caraway responded the next day in a handwritten letter, stating, “For what it is worth, I have been told that [the dispatcher] is ‘out to get me’ and ‘hates my guts’ by the other dispatchers.”