Richmond, Va. (WTVR) – Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey wants the Superior Court of the State of California for Los Angeles to find singer Chris Brown in violation of his probation. The D.A.’s office also accused the Richmond Police department of being sloppy.
Brown was ordered to serve out his probation in Richmond after he was convicted in 2009 of beating then girlfriend – singer Rihanna.
Lacey said based on evidence his office received, it was impossible for Brown to have completed the community service as signed-off by members of the Richmond Police department.
In a court motion, L.A. Deputy District Attorney Mary Murray said Brown’s community service should not be accepted because of what appears to be “significant discrepancies indicating at best sloppy documentation and at worst fraudulent reporting.”
A source tells CBS 6 that Brown was able to use his mother’s connections-a long term friendship–with a former Richmond Police Captain to get a special community service program created for his probation.
Brown’s lawyer asked the former captain to arrange a special probation for Brown that would be supervised by the Richmond Police Department, the source said.
In September 2012, when prosecutor’s were questioning how many hours Brown had completed, Chief Norwood told CBS 6 that he, as chief, only answers to the judge in the case. Norwood said Brown completed his community service as ordered by the courts.
Ordinarily, Brown would go to a community service program administered by the Richmond Sheriff’s Office. Sources couldn’t recall an arrangement such as Brown’s ever being created in the past.
Records show that Brown was at the Richmond Fire Headquarters and several fire stations. Lt. Hagaman has said that they did not supervise Brown, but that the Richmond Police Department did. CBS 6 has inquired if anyone from the department witnessed Brown doing work, but have not heard back at time of publishing.
Gene Lepley, a Richmond Police Department spokesperson, released a statement Tuesday afternoon saying that “it would be inappropriate to comment on a matter before the court.”