Meth bust spotlights S.F. lab’s problems
Staffers describe lower standards at coroner’s office
Staff members at the San Francisco medical examiner’s office had lost confidence in their management team years before a coworker was allegedly caught last month driving in Utah with an evidence bag of methamphetamine, an arrest that could lead to thousands of criminal cases being compromised.
Four former employees told The Chronicle they feared that the standards of the office were being undermined and eroded — concerns backed up by documents and emails obtained by the newspaper.
In 2017, the office lost its accreditation from the National Association of Medical Examiners. Then in 2019, after twice failing to receive the certification required for his
own role, Chief Forensic Toxicologist Luke Rodda successfully lobbied to have that requirement removed from his city job description, emails show.
Rodda and other managers worked to strip other requirements from toxicologist positions, against the wishes of many employees, who said the certifications were important for their credibility and careers, emails show.
But while some staffers appealed the changes or quit the office, at least one toxicologist continued to vocally support his superiors, according to documents and an audio recording. That was Justin Volk, the forensic analyst who is now facing drug charges in Utah.
Rodda did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Chronicle. Neither did Volk or another supervisor in the office, SueLan Pearring.
Bill Barnes, a spokesman for the City Administrator’s Office, which oversees the medical examiner’s office, said he could not comment on individual personnel matters.
“By and large, I think people have confidence in the work of the toxicologists,” Barnes said, adding that the city administrator is “concerned” about tumult in the office and has long fought to get more staff to deal with high caseloads there. “Is there more work to do? Absolutely.”
Volk’s arrest has prompted a sprawling review at the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, as officials scramble to determine the universe of criminal cases he may have tainted. The city Controller’s Office is conducting its own assessment to determine whether all drug evidence at the medical examiner’s office is properly stored and accounted for. The Controller’s Office could potentially broaden its review to include the office’s policies for handling evidence.
Exemployees said the number of cases touched by Volk is far larger than initially reported: During his 13year stint in the office, they said, he could have been involved with up to 25,000 medical investigations, everything from rape cases to DUIs to drug overdoses.
A preliminary review released by the District Attorney’s Office found that Volk handled approximately 2,500 cases in the last eight years, including 500 death investigations and toxicology testing for 1,200 sexual assaults and 800 DUIs.
The scandal has horrified some former staffers, who fear that years of their work will be thrown in the trash. The Chronicle spoke to the exemployees in accordance with the newspaper’s policy on anonymous sources.
“We don’t know what he has tampered with,” said one former colleague, a forensic toxicologist. “This was the guy tasked with handling evidence. He came in contact with every single case that comes into our lab. This could impact all of our cases, in terms of them being overturned.”
But the former employees don’t just blame Volk. They say that over the last several years, the office has been mismanaged, allowing problems to fester, damaging employee morale and even driving some qualified toxicologists to quit.
Frustration in the office spiked last summer, when managers made a series of sudden changes that lowered the minimum job requirements for toxicologists — most notably, for the chief.
Rodda, who was born in Australia, studied pharmaceutical sciences at college in Melbourne and earned his doctorate in forensic medicine from Australia’s Monash University in 2016.
When he was hired as the city’s chief forensic toxicologist that year, leading a team of medical detectives, his job description required him to get certified by the American Board of Forensic Toxicology, or ABFT.
Twice over the next three years, Rodda took the exam. Both times he failed, according to a Nov. 3 letter from Deputy City Administrator Kenneth Bukowski to a city prosecutor.
“When Dr. Rodda was hired as Chief Forensic Toxicologist, the job specifications for the position required ‘Coursework and experience to meet certification requirements,’ with an expectation that such certification be obtained following his hire,” the letter stated. “Under the job specifications currently posted, that certification is no longer a requirement for the position.”
Records show that Rodda took the certification test for the first time in December 2016. It was a written exam administered by the ABFT. The following month, he received a letter from the ABFT that read in part, “I am sorry to report that you did not receive a passing score.” It is unclear when he attempted to retake the test.
Emails obtained by The Chronicle show Rodda had a hand in lowering the standards for his own job requirement, as well as those for his staff.
“In essence, the ABFT certification is voluntary for forensic toxicologists,” Rodda wrote to San Francisco’s Department of Human Resources on July 4, 2019.
Rodda argued that “although conceptually it appears advantageous to have all forensic toxicologists around the country certified,” for San Francisco’s lab it didn’t make sense. He wrote that the certification was antiquated, would require studying techniques and literature that would never be used in the city, and would consume too many staff resources.
Rodda and others also successfully argued to remove an alcohol testing certification from the requirements for an entrylevel lab analyst, emails show.
Rodda’s qualifications have come under scrutiny before. In 2018, San Francisco settled a $100,000 wrongful termination lawsuit with Nikolas Lemos, Rodda’s predecessor, who said he “begrudgingly resigned” in 2016 due to concerns about Rodda.
After being recruited by the city in 2003 to lead the office’s toxicologists, Lemos and other managers worked for years to upgrade equipment and procedures, Lemos said in an interview.
The lab facility was certified by the ABFT in 2011, Lemos said. The following year, with the support of employees and their union, Lemos pushed to change the city job descriptions of individual toxicologists to require that they be certified.
Lemos’ suit alleged that Rodda, who then worked under Lemos, did not possess the necessary credentials to conduct DUI testing, making the tests illegal. Lemos said his employers ignored his concerns and instructed him to continue signing off on his testing.
“(Lemos) would not have resigned had he not been put in a position where he would be required to either perjure himself, and/or damage his professional credibility such that he could not continue working in his field,” the complaint states.
In court filings, city attorneys denied many of Lemos’ allegations. The city did not admit fault in the settlement.
“To me, it’s shocking that a city like San Francisco took a job description that had the certification requirements there, and lowered them, just to accommodate the failures of some people who couldn’t pass the exams,” Lemos said. “Everybody aspires to raise the bar. We are the ones who went downwards.”
Barnes, the city administrator’s spokesman, said Rodda is qualified to serve as chief forensic toxicologist. Barnes called Rodda’s education “top in the field” and pointed to national lectures he has given on forensic topics.
Barnes also defended the city’s decision to lower the job requirements for toxicologists, saying the move was intended “to increase the pool of applications for these toxicologist positions, to make sure that toxicology reports came back in a timely manner.” He pointed out that the toxicology lab as a whole remains accredited by the ABFT.
The National Association of Medical Examiners, which stopped accrediting the office in 2017, is a different group than ABFT. Looking beyond toxicology procedures, NAME considers issues related to autopsies and other factors affecting the office, such as caseloads, turnaround time and the qualifications of individuals. One question asked by NAME is whether the chief toxicologist is boardcertified.
The attempt to lower the office’s standards troubled enough staff members that it prompted a formal appeal from their union, IFPTE Local 21.
The appeal called the changes “a disservice to the Lab and the individuals employed in these classifications,” adding, “Our members have expressed interest in furthering their education and beginning coursework to obtain these certifications and have continuously been discouraged and denied.”
Volk, however, stepped out against the appeal, backing Rodda.
“I am a forensic lab analyst for the San Francisco medical examiner’s office,” Volk told the San Francisco Civil Service Commission during a hearing on the appeal Nov. 4. “I have been there for, now, 12 years, and I have testified in (a) DUI alcohol case. I don’t have that certification, I’ve never been asked about it, and I don’t think it needs to be on the job classification.”
The commission ultimately voted 41 against the union’s appeal, in effect upholding the lowered minimum qualifications.
Sandy Feinland, forensic lead attorney for the San Francisco public defender’s office, said reliable evidence in criminal cases requires stringent protocols.
“Too much is at stake for the lives of our clients to depend on cronyism, incompetence and enabling of rogue behavior,” he said.
San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin echoed Feinland’s sentiments.
“This city of San Francisco deserves, and my office requires, a medical examiner that meets basic minimum requirements for handling and processing of evidence,” Boudin said. “And a medical examiner’s office that isn’t moving the goalposts in the middle of the game.”
San Francisco Public Defender Mano Raju said that the latest revelations, paired with the office’s recent loss of accreditation, were grounds for a temporary closure of the toxicology lab.
Raju, whose office has twice before called for investigations into the medical examiner’s office, said the toxicology lab’s work should for the time being be sent out to accredited offices.
“The fact that the head of the toxicology lab pushed to lower the standards for his own job description is emblematic of the lowering of standards of the Medical Examiner’s Office across the board,” Raju said in a statement. “Given its loss of accreditation, high turnover rate, and deteriorating protocols that have now come to light, this is clearly an office in need of an overhaul.”
On Thursday, Raju called for acting Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Amy Hart to be investigated and fired, saying in a letter to Mayor London Breed, the California Medical Board president and executives at the National Association of Medical Examiners that Hart has mismanaged the office and given misleading testimony for highstakes criminal cases.
Raju accused Hart of engaging in “a pattern of bias, dishonesty, secrecy and unprofessionalism.” Much of the allegations focus on Hart’s role as a forensic pathologist who performs autopsies and provides testimony in trials.
“Hart is not a credible witness and the truthseeking function of the court process is thwarted,” Raju wrote. “Victims and their families suffer as do the accused, and justice itself.”
Hart did not respond to The Chronicle’s requests for comment.