08/19/2025
Please see the Formal Complaint below filed against South Bend Police Department Officer Joshua Morgan. The SBPD and Morgan talk about transparency and accountability, yet why do we never see said accountability?
------
The following is written in response to Officer Josh Morgan’s Police Report:
Officer Josh Morgan wrote: “During the meeting a citizen, identified as Logan Foster, approached the microphone to speak about David Niezgodski and…” Officer Josh Morgan failed to include that the aforementioned citizen is also a local journalist who is investigating the Common Council. This is important later on in the report.
As we read the report, we cannot help but notice that Officer Josh Morgan is testifying throughout his report. The first example is when Officer Josh Morgan writes: “I was sitting in the back row with Sgt. Demler and Officer Chaput. I could not clearly hear what Sheila was saying but I could read her lips. Sheila stated to Logan “What’s your problem… would you please stop?” Those are direct quotes from Officer Josh Morgan and from those of us who interacted with Sheila Niezgodski directly, she did not use those exact quotes. Officer Josh Morgan's claims he could have read Sheila Niezgodski’s lips (effectively enough to put it in a police report) from across the room in the back row through multiple bodies, camera equipment, commotion, etc… is completely irresponsible and inaccurate. Where was Officer Josh Morgan trained to read lips? Where is his certification on lip reading? If yes, is his certification still valid?
As of right now, our opinion is Officer Josh Morgan, as well as the South Bend Common Council, is not supporting Logan Foster’s rights as a journalist (awarded to him in the US & Indiana Constitutions) as well as his rights as a human to redress his government. The South Bend Common Council and the South Bend Police Department are allowing elected officials to intimidate, harass, and threaten the public without a factual police report to document the event in question.
Officer Josh Morgan writes, "In my police experience (Sheila Niezgodski) did not appear to be standing in a threatening manner or in a manner in which she was prepared to attack.” Officer Josh Morgan’s past police experience is another example of testimony inserted into a police report. If Officer Josh Morgan’s police experience allowed him to know when someone was going to attack or not, he would never need to unholster his weapon unless he was going to fire his weapon. For example, was it not Officer Josh Morgan who infamous shot himself in the leg a few years ago when attempting to reholster his own service weapon? Wouldn’t his years of self-claimed police experience of holstering his weapon have prevented shooting himself in the leg? What does Officer Josh Morgan’s police experience have to do with Sheila Niezgodski threatening, intimidating, and assaulting Logan Foster and attempting to coerce him to stop using his constitutional right to investigate wrongdoings? Officer Josh Morgan’s assertion that his extensive police experience provides any justification for his handling of the incident involving Mr. Logan Foster is deeply flawed. Sheila Niezgodski’s attempt to hinder Mr. Foster’s inquiries into government contracts through threats of violence is a serious offense that demands a precise and thorough investigation. However, Officer Josh Morgan’s report is notably deficient, relying heavily on personal opinions rather than verifiable facts. Officer Josh Morgan’s report fails to mention that Sheila Niezgodski’s arm came up to strike Logan, and Sharon McBride pulled her away and saved Logan Foster from being physically attacked. President Sharon McBride and Councilman Canneth Lee pulled and pushed Sheila Niezgodski away from Logan, no one pulled Logan away as he was not the instigator but clearly was the victim.
There were four front-row witnesses to Sheila Niezgodski’s assault on Logan. None of the SBPD officers took witness testimony. Also, they did not take witness testimony from all the council members. It is alarming that Officer Josh Morgan failed to identify or even attempt to collect statements from four key witnesses who were in the front row during the incident.
Given Officer Josh Morgan’s years of service, it is reasonable to expect him to adhere to standard police procedures, including the critical task of obtaining witness testimonies. South Bend Police Policy 323 explicitly states the necessity of such actions: "323.2 POLICY It is the policy of the South Bend Police Department that members shall act with promptness and efficiency in the preparation and processing of all reports. Reports shall document witnesses, evidence, sufficient information to refresh the member’s memory and shall provide enough detail for follow-up investigation and successful prosecution." Officer Josh Morgan’s report, which fails to include any witness names despite the availability of willing witnesses, clearly violates this policy. This oversight not only undermines the integrity of Josh Morgan’s report but also hampers the potential for a thorough and just investigation for a successful prosecution.
Officer Josh Morgan demonstrated a pattern of manipulative behavior reminiscent of an attorney steering the narrative in a deposition. For instance, when the victim, Logan, stated, "you guys saw it, I didn't do anything," Officer Josh Morgan immediately countered with a series of questions never giving Logan a chance to reply, "Saw what?" "What is it that happened? Did she assault you? Yes or no?" Despite Logan's attempt to respond, Officer Josh Morgan interrupted with the same rigid, binary question, leading to a baffled "No" from Logan, who later clarified that he had, in fact, been assaulted. Utilizing his extensive police experience and authoritative influence, Officer Josh Morgan dominated the interaction, presenting a demeanor more akin to an abuser's advocate rather than a protector of the victim. At no point did he offer Logan basic courtesies such as asking if he was okay or if he needed a moment to gather his thoughts. Instead, Officer Josh Morgan aggressively pushed Logan into yes-or-no answers that he did not fully understand, without providing the necessary context or definitions. This approach seemed designed to obtain the responses needed to swiftly close the case in a manner that suited Officer Josh Morgan's objectives rather than seeking the truth of the situation.
20 seconds into the body camera recording, Mr. Foster begins to describe the assault he experienced, a testimony that Officer Josh Morgan disregarded throughout the interaction. In an attempt to shift the narrative, Officer Josh Morgan suggested that he might feel threatened by Logan, the victim, simply because Logan had his hands in his jacket pockets. However, this implication was clearly unfounded as Logan had passed through metal detectors and a security checkpoint, making it evident that he was unarmed.
At 0:55, Mr. Foster stated, "I would like some kind of documentation that this woman, an elected official, came up to me, raised her fist at me, got in my face, I didn't move from my spot...." Officer Josh Morgan agreed to document the incident. At 1:30, Officer Josh Morgan asked again whether Mr. Foster had been physically assaulted. Mr. Foster corrected him, elaborating on his understanding of assault and asserting that he did feel assaulted. He clarified, "She did not physically touch me, no, but assault has different terms. I am not going to give that up, yet I did fear for my life."
The handling of this case by Officer Josh Morgan raises significant concerns about adherence to the South Bend Police Department’s policies, specifically policy 323.2. Officer Josh Morgan explicitly acknowledges that Sheila Niezgodski's actions constituted intimidation, as evidenced by his statement, "Intimidation, yes." Despite this admission, Officer Josh Morgan’s official report conspicuously omits the critical detail of Sheila Niezgodski's intimidation. This omission appears to be intentional and undermines the thoroughness mandated by the department's policy. According to policy 323.2, all reports must document witnesses, evidence, and sufficient information to not only refresh the memory of the reporting officer but also to facilitate a detailed follow-up investigation and support a successful prosecution. By leaving out Sheila Niezgodski's intimidation and threats toward Foster, Officer Josh Morgan's report fails to meet these crucial requirements. The absence of this information in the report potentially jeopardizes the prosecution's case, considering Sheila Niezgodski's actions could qualify as a Level 6 Felony due to the nature of the victim’s occupation and the context of the intimidation.
The false statement made on Officer Josh Morgan's report, claiming that Logan has been badgering Sheila Niezgodski at meetings for the past year, constitutes a grave misrepresentation of the facts. Given that all public meetings are recorded and accessible to the public, this deception is verifiable. It is unacceptable for a City Council President to fabricate allegations in a police report, especially when the evidence clearly shows that Mr. Foster did not attend his first City Council Meeting until August 2023, which is a mere 9 months before he was assaulted by Sheila Niezgodski. Furthermore, Mr. Foster has not engaged in badgering behavior; rather, he has exercised his constitutional rights by asking questions of public interest and addressing his government. These actions are protected under both the Indiana and United States Constitutions. To punish Mr Foster for exercising his rights would be violating his rights.
It is evident through the backroom interview that Officer Josh Morgan's conduct was highly unprofessional and compromised the integrity of the investigation. By asking and answering questions for Sheila Niezgodski and allowing President McBride to interject inappropriately, Officer Josh Morgan muddied the clarity of witness statements. His interruption of President McBride, and feeding of answers, demonstrate a clear bias and manipulation of the interview process. Such actions undermine the credibility of the report and violate legal and ethical standards required in law enforcement procedures. Officer Josh Morgan's behavior could be seen as an attempt to shape the narrative to fit a predetermined conclusion, casting serious doubt on the reliability of the case documentation.
Officer Josh Morgan asserts that Sheila Niezgodski was neither in a "fighting stance" nor had her arm in a "punching motion." Is it necessary for an individual to adopt a fighting stance or perform a punching motion to qualify as assault? Does the absence of a fighting stance or punching motion imply that the assault or attempted battery did not occur? Officer Josh Morgan also testified that "President McBride intervened to prevent the situation from escalating into yelling, as it would not reflect well or be good publicity for the Common Council." Officer Josh Morgan questioned Sheila Niezgodski about raising her hand toward Foster. Sheila Niezgodski responded, "I thought he was going to swing the camera into my face. I was trying to block the camera from getting into my face." Observing the footage, it is clear that Sheila Niezgodski attempted to strike Foster. If she had been trying to block the camera, she would have raised the arm closest to the camera, not the arm she lifted, which left her exposed to the camera.
Officer Josh Morgan's report is deeply flawed and riddled with inaccuracies. He erroneously claimed that a piece of political mail, created by the Women's Voices PAC and disseminated as voter information, was a meme generated by Redress South Bend L.L.C. or Logan Foster. This significant error is compounded by the fact that Redress South Bend L.L.C. merely posted and commented on political mail they received as part of their service to the public during the primary election. Furthermore, Officer Morgan swore under the pains and penalties of perjury that the company's cover photo was a meme, which it was not—it was, in fact, legitimate political mail distributed widely across the region. The gravity of these falsehoods demands serious scrutiny. What repercussions will Officer Josh Morgan face for violating the perjury oath? Additionally, what accountability will fall upon President McBride and Vice President Niezgodski for their dishonest contributions to the police report?
