VIENNA — Sheriff Mark Morgan spoke to Maries County Commissioners on Oct. 9 concerning $5,300 that went missing from the evidence room at the sheriff’s office in June.

Morgan confirmed the Missouri State Highway Patrol continues to lead the criminal investigation. Intermittently, his office has completed its own internal review, prompting a detailed look into the handling of evidence and cash within the sheriff’s office.

Morgan said he deliberately waited to begin his internal review until after state investigators had the opportunity to conduct their own initial interviews. He said the decision was made to preserve the integrity of the criminal case and ensure investigators could approach witnesses and employees without prior influence from his office.

“I wanted the criminal investigators to have their first shot at interviews before me,” Morgan said. “Typically when you do an investigation, you get more out of your first interview with somebody than you do two or three interviews later.”

Morgan explained internal investigations operate differently than criminal ones, particularly when it comes to the rights of employees. In an internal case, deputies or staff can be ordered to cooperate as a condition of employment, but any statements they make cannot be used against them in a criminal proceeding.

“For criminal purposes, you have the right against self-incrimination,” Morgan said. “So it can’t be used against them because if I ordered them to answer my questions and take the lie detector test, it’s not optional.”

Morgan said his internal review led to the termination of a deputy for policy violations, though he did not release the employee’s name. The investigation included interviews and reviewing surveillance camera footage, but Morgan said it was primarily a policy review.

“That investigation is specifically just to evaluate our policies and determine if an employee violated our policy or not,” Morgan said. “I was able to identify multiple policy violations, which resulted in the termination of one deputy.”

According to Morgan, the cash in question never made it into the department’s secure evidence room. He said the money was last seen in the evidence processing area, a smaller room just inside the sheriff’s office used to document and prepare evidence before it is officially logged.

“The problem area was the processing room,” he said. “That’s where it went missing from. It never actually made it into the secure evidence room.”

The processing room sits just under the stairway inside the sheriff’s office. Morgan described it as a work area where deputies first bring in evidence, photograph it, weigh it and complete paperwork before placing it into a temporary locker. From there, a staff member logs it, tags it and moves it into the secure evidence room where only authorized personnel have access.

“When it’s logged into evidence, it gets assigned a barcode in our tracking software,” Morgan said. “There’s a barcode scanner, like at a grocery store and I scan the barcode on that. It’ll pop up in the computer and tell me what case it’s going to, when it was seized, who it was seized by, when it was put in evidence, has it been out to the crime lab and even has it come back from the lab.”

He emphasized the secure evidence room was not compromised and that the cash never entered the temporary lockers used to transfer evidence between rooms.

County Clerk Rhonda Rodgers asked Morgan about a Facebook post he made at 9:30 a.m. on Oct. 7 through the Maries County Sheriff Department’s page regarding the termination of a deputy after the internal investigation was completed by Morgan.

“What made you decide to go ahead and release your internal investigation results before the patrol had their criminal one done,” Rodgers asked Morgan.

Morgan said he made the decision to publicly announce an internal investigation had been completed because of growing speculation the issue was being ignored.

“People were looking at it like we’re not doing anything,” Morgan said. “I didn’t like the idea that people thought that $5,300 is gone and nobody cares. I do care. It (expletive deleted) me off, honestly. It’s never happened before.”

Rodgers then asked Morgan about the public perception of the social media post.

“I’m just throwing this out there. If I was just a random person out here and from reading comments, the consensus of the people was that, that was the person who took the money,” she said.

Morgan’s response didn’t directly address the comment.

“Well unfortunately, the Missouri Police Officer Bill of Rights prohibits me from releasing a whole lot of information,” Morgan said. 

Rodgers moved on to ask about body cameras and whether anything had been recorded.

“Parts of it (regarding body camera footage),” Morgan said.

Morgan said footage from the officer’s body camera confirmed the missing money reached the processing area, but was left unsecured there.

According to Morgan, because of ongoing construction and remodeling occuring at the time, cameras were not yet installed inside the processing areas. Since the incident, the areas are now fully equipped with twenty-four-hour surveillance systems being watched at all times.

“We’ve corrected that (cameras),” Morgan said. “There’s now a camera in the processing room and one in the evidence room. When you walk into the area, there’s a camera there, and then another once you go into the secure evidence room.”

According to retired Maries County Sheriff Chris Heitman, as of 6 p.m. on Dec. 31, 2024, all cameras were operational. This includes the camera that was outside the evidence processing area. Former Chief Deputy Scott John also confirmed all cameras were working before his own departure in November, including a camera located outside the processing room that was directed inward.

“I left in the beginning of November last year,” John said. “All the cameras were functioning properly.”

In addition to the cameras, Heitman said when it comes to process safety and procedure, the normal process would be to place the item in a pass-through locker and lock it.

“From what I understand, what the normal process would be, is to put it into a pass-through locker and lock it,” said Heitman.

The missing evidence never made it to the locker, according to Morgan.

Morgan said the loss was deeply frustrating for him personally, as it’s the first time anything of this nature has occurred under his watch. He said the situation has prompted renewed focus on tightening procedures and ensuring accountability.

“Honestly, it really ticked me off,” he said. “It’s something I’ve never seen happen here before, and I want to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

Presiding Commissioner Vic Stratman asked what the proceedure is for evidence if a conviction is made.

“If it was seized in connection with drug activity, like proceeds from drug sales, then it gets seized by the state,” Morgan said. “The prosecutor’s office handles that and determines how it’s distributed.”

Morgan said his understanding is portions of forfeited funds are directed toward state programs, sometimes education, though he said he would defer to the county prosecutor Anthony (Tony) Skouby’s office for exact details.

“I don’t want to speak for them or give the wrong information,” he said. “But it doesn’t just come back to us.”

In addition, Eastern Commissioner Doug Drewel asked Morgan how the missing money is supposed to get paid back. Morgan said he was unsure and advised that would be a question for Skouby. Morgan said the focus now remains on the MSHP’s criminal investigation, which will determine whether charges are filed. As of The Advocate’s deadline, no charges were filed.