This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
Newport News Police Department
N. Financial Disclosure Statements [26.3.6(e)]
An employee may be compelled to make financial disclosure statements when directly and narrowly
related to allegations of misconduct involving any unlawful financial gain. Any such evidence gained
during the investigation of an administrative matter will not be shared with criminal investigators.
O. Utilization of polygraph examinations in administrative will follow ADM-275: Polygraph Examinations.
[26.3.6(f)]
P. The employee may review the administrative investigative file. When reviewing the investigative file, the
employee may take notes but is only entitled to review their statement once the investigation is
completed. The review of exact statements from other personnel, complainants, or witnesses is
prohibited. All statements are confidential and not subject to disclosure. Devices with camera capabilities
(e.g., cellular phones) are not permitted in the area where the employee reviews the file. The investigative
files are treated as confidential, and unauthorized viewing, access, photography, or copying of them is
prohibited.
Q. The employee may submit a single written request for further investigative needs or present additional
information pertinent to the case. This is not an opportunity to debate the case or argue guilt or
innocence. This written request must be submitted directly to the administrative investigator assigned
to the case within five days of reviewing the investigative file. It will become a permanent part of the file.
R. The Department is only required to respond to the employee’s initial file review request and the
employee’s initial written request for a follow-up, such as additional investigative action and/or further
interviews, resulting from the employee’s case review.
S. Classifications and Notification of Complaint Findings
1. After review by the Chief of Police, the Assistant Chief of Police, and/or the precinct/division
commander (depending upon the group of misconduct), the complaint(s) are classified into one of
the following six categories: [26.3.8]
a. Exonerated: The incident occurred but was lawful and proper.
b. Refused to cooperate: The complainant refused to cooperate with the investigation, and a
determination cannot be made.
c. Withdrawn: The complaint may be classified as "withdrawn" in the following instances:
1) The complainant has decided not to pursue the original allegation, and there is no evidence
to warrant a continued investigation; or
2) There is no criminal nexus to the complaint, and it involves a sole employee who separates
employment from the city before the investigation starts or during the investigation process.
d. Unfounded: The allegation is unfounded in that it has been proven to be false or not factual.
e. Substantiated: The allegation is supported by sufficient evidence to justify a reasonable
conclusion that the allegation is factual.
f. Not substantiated: There is insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegation that
occurred.
2. Both the complainant and the involved employee(s) are notified either in person, by phone, or by
mail (electronic or U.S. Postal Service) by the Chief of Police or designee of the results of complaints
investigated by the IAD. The complainant will only be advised as to the disposition of the
investigation; the employee(s) is advised of the disposition and recommended action(s) to be taken.
[26.3.4(c)]
NOTE: An exception to this would be a complaint where communication was handled through an
attorney, in which case the City Attorney will be consulted before notifications. Such letters
will advise the complainant that the matter has been investigated fully and referred to the
City Attorney for further disposition. Any inquiries will be directed to that office. [26.3.4(c)]
ADM-270 - 5 of 9 – 11/17/2025Jump to an indexed page (9 of 9)