Former St. Joseph County assistant prosecutor disputes allegations in her dismissal
CENTREVILLE – A former assistant with the St. Joseph County Prosecutor’s Office said she was unjustly suspended and subsequently terminated following her role in a court case last month before District Court Judge Jeff Middleton.
Deborah Davis said she is being accused by Prosecutor David Marvin of an ethics violation. Marvin, meanwhile, has stated the matter centers on misleading statements Davis allegedly made during the Jan. 16 proceeding.
Davis, 42, said Marvin indicated he completed an investigation into the matter, yet she was never interviewed to provide her side of the story.
“I’ve made myself available … I was given a vague, ‘This is what someone is saying,’ and I said ‘Well, what do you need from me?’” she said. “Our elected prosecutor chose to do his own internal investigation but he did not ask me for any written or verbal statement – my side of things – and he took things out of context from a hearing.”
Davis said she, Marvin and finance director Angie Steinman met shortly thereafter and Davis said Marvin admitted then he did not ask her for input.
A Colon resident and Centreville High School alumna, Davis stepped into the assistant prosecutor role back in 2020 after the office found itself shorthanded with former prosecutor John McDonough on leave. Davis stayed on staff when Marvin took over the office in January 2021.
The court proceeding on Jan. 16 was a preliminary examination for an aggravated stalking case. The defendant was present but the alleged victim – represented by Davis – was not in attendance.
A posting on Middleton’s YouTube channel confirms he inquired about why the victim was not present.
"She was here pursuant to the subpoena (but) I don't know if she's still here or not,” Davis replied to Middleton.
Davis said she escorted the alleged victim from the courthouse to the parking lot around 12:55 p.m., about five minutes before the preliminary examination was scheduled to start.
“Was she willing to testify here today?” Middleton asked.
“She was going to get on the stand if I asked … there was concern because of the hostility and her issues with contact (from the suspect),” Davis said. “She was not in a good place today to testify.”
Middleton appeared somewhat baffled by the scenario.
“I wish she hadn’t left. I mean, she was here under subpoena and then she just drove away?” he said.
Davis responded.
“The concern was that she wasn’t going to testify truthfully today because she was angry and had had contact with (the suspect),” she replied, explaining that her anger was directed to “the system” because her rights to her child had previously been terminated.
Marvin claimed Davis made a false statement, allegedly declining to tell Middleton she had released the victim from her subpoena.
Davis said she saw the defendant and victim speaking in the parking lot, contact that violated a bond condition as well as a personal-protection order against the suspect. A court security guard confirmed he witnessed the parking lot conversation between the suspect and alleged victim.
According to WWMT-TV, when asked why she didn't explain to Middleton what happened prior to the hearing, Davis said she was concerned for the victim.
"This victim in particular has had so many issues with this relationship with this individual. My feeling was that if (the defendant) were aware that I was going to dismiss it before I found out about this contact that he would then ramp up his efforts to continue harassing her, intimidating her or potentially hurting her," Davis told WWMT. "What I do know is he has violated his bonds, not only in the case for that day, but the other two cases that were still pending upstairs and violating a PPO. So, in my mind he was not entitled to know that I was going to dismiss, that he had done enough damage to the witness in her willingness to cooperate that it was working. I didn’t want to tip him off."
During the court hearing Middleton said, "I’m troubled that (the victim) was never going to testify today regardless of what happened because she had already been released or I’m not sure. But she was leaving. She wasn’t going to come in here and I wasn’t going to have an opportunity to speak to her."
Middleton eventually canceled the defendant's bond and the defendant went to jail. The case, however, was dismissed by Marvin Jan. 18 and the defendant was released from jail. It was also the same day Marvin suspended Davis; she was fired Jan. 25.
While Davis stands by how she handled the matter that day, she reiterated her concern is Marvin and what Davis called a sham investigation.
“It was the elected prosecutor’s position that we should just basically ignore what we saw (in the parking lot) and (violations of protective orders) are not worth fighting for,” Davis said. “That is not my philosophy and he twisted it to make it look like I was maliciously prosecuting this individual and I had no intention of going forward with the case, which is absolutely untrue.”
She said the suspect needs to be held accountable for making contact with the alleged victim.
“Otherwise, why do we even have laws?” Davis said. “I did what I thought was right and I intended to go forward with that case on the 30th (of January).”
Davis, whose work for the county came with a salary in excess of $80,000 a year, said she was handling criminal sexual conduct cases involving children as victims at the time she was let go.
“I take no pleasure in saying these things about an elected official who I trusted,” Davis said. “This is hearsay within hearsay and that’s not how the law works. This is a career-ending allegation for someone and (Marvin) didn’t even take the very basic step of asking me for a statement or telling me what he thinks I lied about. All of this is revolving around one person who has every reason to want to destroy my reputation because I’m going to be running for the position that he is most likely going to be running for.”
Davis, who has been practicing law since 2007, confirmed her candidacy for county prosecutor. Meanwhile, Marvin last week made official his candidacy for re-election to another four-year term. The election is Aug. 6.
Marvin said the report he submitted regarding Davis’ dismissal was turned over last week to the Michigan Bar Grievance Commission. He said the content of his three-page report speaks for itself.
In the report obtained by the Sturgis Journal through a Freedom of Information Act request, Marvin alleges Davis made false, evasive and misleading statements at least eight times during the January proceeding. Marvin provided several examples of alleged wrongdoings, referring to Davis’ actions as evasive/misleading and lying by omission.
Among the alleged inconsistencies noted by Marvin:
Davis did not disclose that she told the victim the case was being dismissed and subsequently released her. “(Davis) walked victim to the security exit approximately 50 minutes prior to this in-court false statement,” Marvin stated.
Davis does not inform Middleton that she released the victim from the subpoena and told her the case was being dismissed.
Davis mislead Middleton by claiming the victim was not going to testify truthfully, in part, because she had contact with the defendant.
No contact between the victim and defendant happened in the courthouse or in the presence of Davis, yet she accuses the defendant of creating hostility and tendering the victim unavailable.
Davis claimed the defendant stared and intimidated the victim while the victim sat in the waiting room, “but this is not true,” Marvin stated. “(Davis) only knew of contact after court security informed her once (Davis) had released witness from subpoenas and witness left the building.”
Marvin stated he reviewed the proceeding via Middleton’s YouTube page “multiple times” and the report included information following interviews with the victim, prosecutor’s office staff, court security, Middleton and the lead officer in the case.
This article originally appeared on Sturgis Journal: St. Joseph County assistant prosecutor fired
