Final adverse actions against the remaining three DOC Officers were served last week, terminating them from the Department of Corrections.
Guam – “He received on Friday a final notice of adverse action which the department of corrections had issued they had mailed out but did not serve him until Friday morning and then later they attempted to serve him with an amended notice of final adverse action,” disclosed Attorney Curtis Van de Veld.
That notice was to inform the Head of Internal Affairs Jeff Limo that his employment with the Department was terminated. So what was the basis for Limo’s termination?
In the notice of adverse action Van de Veld states that one reason was that Limo failed to generate reports relative to Ronald Meno and Bruno Simmons.
“So, Mr. Limo as he was acquiring information from Roland Meno indicated that he was the conduit for information from inmate Bruno Simmons that he was turning around and providing that information to the Guam Police Department,” shared the attorney.
Van de veld also points out that in the criminal case against his client there are five counts of bribery however, in the adverse action there is only reference to two incidents of bribery. First, related to a visitation arrangement made for Simmons which Van de Veld says is a humanitarian type of visitation normally granted by the prison facility.
According to Van de Veld, “it was conferred between Mr Limo, the Director and the Deputy Director and then it was agreed that it would be held at the office of the Department of Corrections Director.”
The second incident referred to a bribe supposedly to allow Simmons to be moved from POST 6 or the Maximum Security Unit to POST 7. But according to Van de Veld his client was just doing his job in ensuring that there was no opportunity for improper communications to occur with Simmons.
“It even says in the notice of proposed adverse action that when it is someone providing information that is the normal location to transfer them to.”
He further states that Limo relayed information received from Meno and Simmons as well as information on his co-defendants to the Police Department.
So how did Limo get swept up into the Conspiracy to promote Major Prison Contraband if he was providing information to GPD?
Van de Veld shared, “its easy to point fingers at the person doing the investigation.”
Further stating, “Mr. Limo feels that he has become somehow swept up in this inappropriately because of the fact that he had been providing the information all of the activities as he was receiving it from Mr Meno.”
In fact there are some text messages sent by Meno to Limo with vague references to money.
“But there is no if you do this, you will get paid this kind of message and the only person that indicates that anything was paid was Mr. Meno,” stated Van de Veld.
Meno alleges that on two occasions he paid Limo $500.00, which Limo denies and according to Van de Veld, Meno is not credible and instead has motive against his client. Further stating that he believes the Government will have difficulty in proving the charges against his client and once Limo is acquitted of the charges he should be re-instated as a correctional officer.
Van de Veld adds that his client will be filing an appeal with the Civil Service Commission within the allotted 20 day time frame.