Fornshell said based on both the administrative investigation and the criminal investigation, there was no evidence that Holmes received any tangible benefit from his actions. Lebanon officers have wide discretion to issue warnings to motorists who commit moving violations. There was no evidence of any kickbacks from the motorists or quid pro quos from Holmes.
Lebanon does not have a “quota” system for its officers, according to Fornshell. Nor did Holmes receive any compensation, promotion, or duty assignment as a result of the increased number of citations that Lebanon’s internal records showed him issuing.
Fornshell said that the details of Holmes’ actions will still be disclosed to defendants in all cases involving Holmes, pursuant to the United States Supreme Court decisions in Brady v. Maryland and Giglio v. United States, which involve turning over potentially exculpatory evidence.