MOUNT PLEASANT — Calls for an external investigation into the town’s police department are increasing after the Jan. 23 announcement that 10 officers were let go in a cheating scandal.
Some councilmembers say they were left in the dark about the internal investigation surrounding officers who had access to the answers of a S.C. Criminal Justice Academy test.
Council will discuss the departures, the test cheating and investigation in a closed-door portion of their annual retreat on Jan. 27. The meeting will be held at Alhambra Hall in Mount Pleasant and starts at 8:30 a.m.
Two officers were immediately terminated for allegedly cheating on the exam, while the other eight officers involved were described as separated from the department, according to a Jan. 23 statement from Police Chief Mark Arnold.
The announcement, which came after business hours that day, was the first official acknowledgement of the terminations provided to Mount Pleasant’s Town Council, Councilman Daniel Brownstein said.
“Our role as a town council is to provide oversight to the entire town, and that is impossible to do if we’re not being sufficiently briefed on the serious issues going on within the town,” Brownstein said.
The internal investigation had been ongoing for several weeks before the police department’s announcement, he said, though council leaders only learned officers had been fired Jan. 23.
The test was overseen by the Mount Pleasant Police Department, the state academy’s spokesperson, Lt. Mikie Pylilo, told the newspaper Jan. 26.
Brownstein said he is worried the 10 officers who are no longer on the payroll represent a larger problem with academic dishonesty in the department.
“My concern is that there are potentially more instances of cheating in the police department,” Brownstein said. “I think it’s very important that we bring in an outside, independent agency to investigate the police department and to get to the bottom of what’s going on.”
Other town leaders said they too felt blindsided by the announcement.
Councilman John Iacofano said he heard rumors about possible terminations on Jan. 23, but did not receive an official memo or notice from the police chief or town administrator until the late afternoon news release was published. He echoed Brownstein’s calls for an independent, external investigation.
The firings came just months after town council unanimously approved wage increases for fire and police employees.
Charleston County’s 2025 property reassessment for Mount Pleasant was estimated to bring in an additional $5 million in tax revenue. Town leaders opted to use the extra money generated from residents’ slightly higher tax bills for raises for police and fire personnel and to increase staffing. Those pay bumps went into effect in October.
Mount Pleasant Mayor Will Haynie did not immediately respond to a phone call seeking comment on Jan. 26. Councilman Howard Chapman, the current Mayor Pro Tem who also serves on the town’s Police, Judicial and Legal Committee, declined to comment on the firings.
Town Administrator Eric DeMoura also declined to answer questions related to the firings.
“Because this matter involves individual employee issues and potential appeal processes, the Town Administrator will not be providing an interview or additional comment at this time,” Eric LaFontaine, the town’s communications director, wrote in an email.
Details about the investigation remain scarce.
The Post and Courier called and emailed the police department spokesperson on Jan. 26 to request more information, such as when the alleged cheating took place, what test was involved and if the department’s investigation is completed or if more people might be implicated in the allegations. The newspaper did not receive a response by the time of publication.
Departments are required to submit separation paperwork to the academy. The paperwork for one officer said he was terminated for “sharing answers on a test,” Pylilo said. It said the separation was a result of misconduct.
The paperwork did not specify the nature of the test. Pylilo was not aware of additional information provided to SCCJA about which test the officers allegedly cheated on.
In South Carolina, officer misconduct is defined by state law. Several different offenses can be categorized as misconduct, including when officers use unsafe practices with weapons, repeatedly use excessive force or admit to committing a crime.
Several different offenses that are categorized as misconduct have to do with lying.
These include misrepresenting employment-related information; lying to a law enforcement officer, agency or agency representative; lying to a court or its staff; lying on a document, record, report or form; falsifying an application for certification or training; and providing false information to the academy.
Councilman Mike Tinkey called the firings alarming. He said the council will be briefed by DeMoura on the investigation, adding that he’s waiting until council has all the facts before forming an opinion.
After that, Tinkey said, they should consider taking steps to prevent this from happening again and “restore trust” from Mount Pleasant residents.
Agencies such as Mount Pleasant are required to report suspensions, excess uses of force misconduct and separations to the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy.
The newspaper filed a public records request on Jan. 25 for separation paperwork as well as other employment, training and disciplinary history that Mount Pleasant reported to the academy. That request has not yet been completed.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by PostX News and is published from a syndicated feed.)
