dme court

A legal dispute is continuing over a Right-to-Know Law request for a former Middlesex Township police officer’s written summary of a March 3, 2024, incident involving a McKeesport man.

Al-Jernon Smith, of McKeesport, who said the incident made him feel he had been profiled as a Black man by police, filed a motion July 7 in Common Pleas Court to dismiss a petition the township filed in May asking the court to reverse a state Office of Open Records ruling in April granting access to the former officer’s summary.

Smith said he was wearing a uniform helping someone make a delivery in a gated community in the township when an officer in a patrol car made a U-turn, called him over to the car and asked for his license and insurance information.

He said he respectfully complied and the officer told him to finish the delivery and return to the patrol car. When Smith did, he said the officer told him charges would be filed within 30 days and he would receive the charges in the mail.

Smith said he was cited for driving without a license, driving with a suspended license and having an expired inspection even though he was not pulled over or driving when the officer made first contact.

Upon Smith’s request, the officer’s supervisor responded to the scene. He said the officer told the supervisor that a taillight was the reason for the stop, but the officer told Smith it was because of the inspection sticker.

“That inconsistency raised red flags,” Smith said. “Then the supervisor asked me, ‘Is your license suspended for child support?’ a completely unfounded question, as that was not the case. That moment made me feel profiled and stereotyped as a Black man not stopped based on anything I was doing, but rather on how I looked.”

Smith said he fought the charges without an attorney and the case dragged on over multiple court dates. At one point, an officer who wasn’t at the scene appeared and offered a deal to drop two charges if Smith pleaded guilty to driving while suspended. He said he declined the offer.

When the officer at the scene finally appeared, he told the court he didn’t want to move forward with the case and dropped all the charges, Smith said. He said dropping the charges confirmed that there was no real basis for the stop or the citations.

On Dec. 9, 2024, the township received a letter from Smith demanding $100,000 and threatening to sue over the stop involving officers Christian Renaud and Randy Davison, according to the township’s petition.

Renaud’s employment with the township was terminated in June that year. He, the township and the police union signed an agreement in September over a dispute relating to the termination. The township’s supervisors and manager did not know about the traffic stop, which was not a factor in Renaud’s termination or the settlement of his grievance, according to the petition. Davison still works for the township and Renaud works for the Saxonburg Police Department.

In January of this year, Smith submitted a Right-to-Know Law request to the township for an incident report or documentation relating to the stop. The township’s open records officer provided some of the documents Smith requested and disclosed to Smith that the township had summaries from Renaud and Davison but the summaries were protected by attorney-client privilege, according to the petition.

On Jan. 30, Smith filed an appeal with the state and later added that he also was appealing the township denial of the officers’ summaries. The open records office denied most of the appeal, but ruled the township must turn over Renaud’s summary.

The petition the township filed in may of this year asks the court to reverse the open records office decision. The petition Smith filed in July asks the court to dismiss the township’s petition.

Township solicitor Michael Hnath could not be reached for comment.