Perkins Twp. won't release alleged drunken officer report

Perkins Township officials and their attorney are refusing to offer a reason for withholding information on an incident involving an allegedly drunken officer.
Emil Whitis
Dec 7, 2012

Following a marathon closed-door meeting Thursday, township authorities would not release facts surrounding Officer Kate Barker's alleged drunkenness as she was about to start work on Thanksgiving Day.     

At least two other officers are also the target of an internal investigation into the matter, but Perkins police Chief Ken Klamar has refused to identify them or explain their role in the incident.   
Township officials held a five-hour, closed-door meeting Thursday to discuss possible discipline for the officers involved, but they ultimately emerged without announcing any decisions.  

It's been a full two weeks since the incident involving Barker, and Klamar and township trustees are still refusing to provide answers.

For more on the initial incident and Perkins Township official's refusal to release information, pick up a copy of Friday's Register.



If there were a legitimate reason to withhold the information, the Chief or the township's legal representative would say that they're withholding the information because, or withholding the information until. Again, the internal investigation of the officers, two of whom haven't even been named, is ongoing and so it's perfectly understandable that we don't yet have that information made public. But there's been no cooperation AND no explanation of a simple police report involving a drunken idiot (who happens to be a cop) who fell asleep in a Taco Bell drive-thru.

If the drive-thru incident is part of the internal investigation, then SAY so. If it isn't, or if it's only peripheral, then release the stupid thing.

Again, I can't argue with you that the Register shows a very clear bias against local law enforcement. You've got a lot of evidence to back up that claim! But that doesn't excuse said law enforcement from adhering to laws concerning public records.


What a bunch of nosey nellies on this site! Who cares?


Two weeks for an investigtion? Five hours in executive session? It is time for decisions to be made. The PPD can't sit on this forever. My guess is that the chief has already made his decision and union is in the way. The union can't stop inappropriate conduct. Police officers are held to a higher standard and need discipline and to be responsibile for their actions.


Investigations need to be thorough and cannot be rushed. Ohio has laws which limit what newspapers can request as public records from meetings. I found some good information for Ohio citizens that appears to be easy to read and understand by any citizen of Ohio.

An Exception: Closed Meetings or Sessions

The general rule is that all meetings of public bodies must be open to the public. If a public body wants to hold a closed or "executive" session, it must identify a specific statutory exemption. Under the Ohio Open Meetings Act, a public body may hold a closed session when it is dealing with one of seven subject-area exemptions found in Ohio Rev. Code § 121.22(G). The seven exemptions are for meetings dealing with the following topics:

• the appointment, employment, dismissal, discipline, promotion, demotion, or compensation of a public employee or official, or the investigation of charges or complaints against a public employee, official, licensee, or regulated individual, unless the public employee, official, licensee, or regulated individual requests a public hearing (this exemption does not apply to the discipline of an elected official for conduct related to the performance of his or her duties);
• the purchase or sale of real estate for public purposes;
• pending or imminent litigation;
• negotiations or bargaining sessions with public employees concerning their compensation or other terms and conditions of their employment;
• matters required to be kept confidential by federal law or regulations or state statutes;
• details relative to the security arrangements and emergency response protocols for a public body or a public office;
• matters involving trade secrets (but only in connection with local hospitals).


wired already stated as much...


I wonder how many law enforcement officers have gone up to their next DUI victim prior to pulling them over and said "I think You have had to much to drink, you better not drive." They are all guilty from the leo's at the bar, to the taco bell disappearing act, to the chief stopping her prior to driving to work, and thinking she has had to much to drink. The chief should have just waited and pulled her over once she has driven on a public road. That is what he would have done if it was me or you. Double standard? You betcha.

Dont Worry Be Happy

Sounds to me that the Chief was preventing a tragedy by not letting her get into a car drunk with a twp badge and gun on. I would have to think that if she caused anyone harm on her way to work or after she got there drunk the twp could have been sued and lives could have been loss. I for one think he did the right thing by stopping her and now he has to fight the FOP union to do what's right. Keep up the great work Chief.


this topic will be on page 4 before dusk...any takers?

he said she said

I have a question. If she knew she had to be to work for an overtime shift at 3 am, what in the blazes was she doing at the bar drinking anyway? She called off from that, which should be a write up. Then try to go in at 7 am for her regular shift and she's still drunk.

If this was anyone else that worked anywhere else but the Perkins Police Department, don't you think you would be fired for trying to show up for work or actually getting to work intoxicated??

My job doesn't require me to carry a gun, require me to drive a vehicle that is not my property, and it doesn't require me to have a clear mind to think clearly when an emergency arises but I do believe that if I showed up for work intoxicated, I would most definitely lose my job. No questions asked.


Political activists and concerned citizens in corrupt Ohio are often targets by the powers that be. Ohio's corrupt courts will help the powers that be try to silence anybody who requests public records.

Just ask Brian Bardwell how the courts of corrupt Cuyahoga County, Ohio went after Brian because he asked for public records for his organization and for other people.

Dont Worry Be Happy

Sounds to me the Chief was preventing a tragedy by not letting her get into a car drunk with a twp badge and gun on. I would have to think that if she caused anyone harm on her way to work or after she got there drunk the twp could have got sued and lives could have been loss. I for one think he did the right thing by stopping her and now has to fight the FOP union to do what's right. Keep up the great work Chief.


So the Register can't get its reports when they want it? Someone call the waaaambulance! It is abundantly clear to everyone that the PPD has been completely turned around under the present leadership. Why can't the Register simply wait until all the "T's" are crossed and "I's" dotted so no one is skewered before the findings come out. The Register would crucify an officer for using lethal force without justification but they do it all the time with their attacking reporting. They fire then aim and unfortunately cry foul when an agency is trying to do the right thing by all parties. You'll get your reports from the PPD and past history under the present leadership should be an indicator of such. I do not work for the PPD so I have no dog in this fight. Thanks Chief for doing a very difficult job well. You've restored respect to this agency.

Dont Worry Be Happy

Well said:-)


Very well said!!!! Could not agree more!

Molon Labe

totally agree Fiddledee!!