WATERLOO -- A former Des Moines police chief testified Tuesday he believed Cedar Falls Police Chief Rick Ahlstrom was justified in firing three police officers.

William Moulder, a police consultant who served as chief in Des Moines from 1984 to 2003, testified in the appeals trial of three police officers who were fired in September 2006 for alleged misuse of their clothing allowances.

The officers, Josh Atteberry, Joel Oltrogge and Holly Pohl, were fired by Ahlstrom for allegedly returning items they purchased to meet the $475 clothing allowance, then keeping credit or money refunded for those purchases. Those firings were upheld by the Cedar Falls Civil Service Commission in November, but a fourth officer, Brad Brown, had his job reinstated.

The city had called Moulder as an expert witness.

Of Pohl, he said, "I believe that termination was appropriate for the same reason -- it was money that was given to the officer for the purpose of purchasing items for use in the line of duty. The purchase took place, but the clothing was returned. It was not using the money for the purpose it was intended."

Moulder made similar statements regarding Atteberry and Oltrogge.

He testified that some offenses by police officers would dictate an immediate firing, for example theft, domestic abuse or offenses regarding honesty.

"You expect officers to be honest, and when they are not honest, they cannot be police officers," Moulder said.

Moulder had reviewed decisions by the Civil Service Commission, exhibits from Atteberry's hearing and written charges against the officers.

Attorney Cheryl Weber, representing the three officers, thought that review was far from enough to base an opinion. She questioned Moulder's knowledge of the case on cross examination, finding Moulder did not know that Brown's job had been terminated and later reversed, or how other officers were disciplined for clothing allowance and other infractions.

Weber questioned how he could decide if the firings were appropriate without knowing the bigger picture.

Oltrogge has testified he purchased items such as a flashlight, handcuffs and a duty bag with his clothing allowance. He then purchased clothing items and returned them, but said he had spent more than his allowance on the equipment and clothing items without the returned items.

When Weber asked if buying flashlights and handcuffs would be considered using clothing allowances for personal use, Moulder said, "no."

Earlier Tuesday, Police Chief Rick Ahlstrom testified that returning the officers to their jobs would make it difficult to fit them back into the department.

He has testified that the officers would likely have "Brady issues." A Brady issue stems from the court case Brady v. Maryland, and results from an officer having some transgression in their past, whether a crime or an employment discipline, which shows dishonesty or a lack of integrity. In a case where a testifying officer has Brady issues, the prosecution is required to inform the defense. Ahlstrom testified that the three officers have Brady issues, and it could affect their credibility on the stand in any future cases.

"Supervisors would have to be very cognizant of duties assigned to the officers and may have to assign other officers to situations where Brady issues could come up," Ahlstrom said.

Weber had questioned Ahlstrom about city policy and where returned items was addressed in the policy. Ahlstrom responded that it was not specifically addressed in the policy, but that he trusted officers would know that items purchased with their clothing allowance should be used for performance of their duties.

Since the Civil Service Commission rulings last November, the police department clothing allowance policy has been changed to add specific language regarding returned items.

The trial continues today and is scheduled to last through the week.

Contact Jon Ericson at (319) 291-1461 or jonathan.ericson@wcfcourier.com.