Investigators say a police chief took evidence from the department and sold it for cash at a local pawn shop

Attorney and legal commentator Steve Lehto says the allegations against a police chief in Indiana are the kind of story that makes people stop and ask, “Really?”

In a new episode of Lehto’s Law, Lehto discussed the case of New Chicago Police Chief Earl Mayo, who has been accused of selling a gun to a pawn shop even though investigators say it was supposed to be held as evidence in a criminal case.

The allegation is serious on its own, but Lehto said the details become even more troubling because evidence is not just ordinary property sitting in a room. It is part of a legal process, and when it leaves police custody improperly, it can damage far more than one investigation.

“Most police departments have an evidence room or an evidence locker,” Lehto explained, noting that evidence is supposed to be kept and tracked until it is needed in court.

That is the simple part of the story. The harder part is what investigators say happened next.

A Gun That Was Supposed To Be Evidence

According to the report Lehto discussed, Mayo was accused of selling a Taurus G3 handgun to Mega Cash Pawn in Hobart, Indiana.

Lehto said the gun was connected to an upcoming criminal trial and was supposed to be held as evidence by police. Instead, court documents allegedly showed that it had been sold to the pawn shop.

That alone raises a major red flag.

As Lehto explained, evidence must be accounted for carefully because a prosecutor may later need to prove where it has been, who handled it, and whether it remained in the same condition from the time it was collected.

That process is often called the chain of custody.

Lehto said that once an item leaves official possession and ends up somewhere like a pawn shop, the situation becomes legally messy in a hurry.

If the gun was sitting behind a counter where unknown people might have handled it, he said, a courtroom claim that it remained untouched and unchanged becomes much harder to make.

“No, that’s not how that works,” Lehto said while describing the problem.

This is the part that makes the story bigger than one official being accused of selling one item. Evidence is the backbone of many criminal cases. If people cannot trust how it is stored, tracked, and protected, the whole system begins to look shaky.

Charges Against The Chief

Lehto said Mayo was charged with theft, official misconduct, attempted obstruction of justice, and unlawful possession of an anabolic steroid, according to court documents cited in the report.

The steroid charge, Lehto admitted, was a detail he did not expect.

“That last one there, I don’t know where that came from,” he said.

Lehto also noted that Mayo was booked in Clark County, Ohio, after authorities said he tried to evade arrest. New Chicago is in Indiana, near Gary, which means the chief being taken into custody in another state added yet another layer to the case.

That detail does not prove guilt by itself, and Lehto was careful to say the case is still at the allegation stage. But it does make the timeline more unusual.

The report Lehto reviewed said a Lake County sheriff’s police commander received a firearm trace request for the gun linked to the upcoming criminal trial. That trace request reportedly led investigators to discover the weapon had been sold to the pawn shop.

From there, authorities allegedly determined that Mayo was the person who sold it.

Lehto also said court documents alleged Mayo was the arresting officer in the case connected to the gun, which would make the alleged sale even more difficult to explain if the accusation is proven.

The Alleged Attempt To Get It Back

One of the strangest parts of the case, according to Lehto, is what investigators say happened after the gun was discovered at the pawn shop.

Another New Chicago officer reportedly told Lake County sheriff’s detectives that Mayo called him and asked him to go to the pawn shop and buy the gun back.

At first glance, Lehto said, someone might argue that such an effort would show the chief was trying to undo the harm.

But legally, Lehto said, buying the gun back would not simply repair the problem because the chain of custody had already been broken.

Once evidence leaves proper custody, the damage is already done.

That is especially true for a firearm connected to a criminal case. If a defense attorney learns that a gun was sold to a pawn shop while supposedly being held as police evidence, that could become a serious issue in court.

It is not just about where the gun is now. It is about where it has been, who had access to it, and whether anyone can prove it was not altered, handled, or contaminated.

For ordinary people, that may sound technical. For a criminal trial, it can be crucial.

Other Allegations At The Home

Lehto said the allegations did not stop with the pawn shop.

According to the report he discussed, another officer told investigators that Mayo allegedly wanted him to go to the chief’s home and retrieve other items from a safe.

Lehto said the officer told investigators that Mayo allegedly said he had things inside his home that “the feds would never find.”

Lehto was careful here, pointing out that these were allegations and that some of the claims involved one person telling investigators what another person allegedly said.

That caution matters. This is still a case that must be tested in court, and court documents are not the same thing as proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Still, if investigators can support those claims, they could matter for the attempted obstruction charge.

Another person, identified in the report as Taneka Borders, was also charged in the case. Lehto said investigators alleged that Borders was found at Mayo’s home and was accused of trying to destroy evidence.

According to the report Lehto reviewed, Borders allegedly admitted Mayo had told her to go to the home and collect testosterone and steroids.

The manager of the pawn shop also reportedly told investigators that a woman came in to buy back the Taurus G3 from its new owner, though the manager did not identify her.

Lehto said the charging document against Borders accused her of trying to help Mayo obtain the gun that had been sold or pawned.

Twelve Previous Gun Sales

Another detail stood out in Lehto’s discussion: the pawn shop manager allegedly said he had purchased multiple guns from Mayo in the past.

Documents reportedly listed Mayo as the seller of 12 guns to the pawn shop.

Lehto emphasized that those earlier sales could have been legitimate. A police chief, like anyone else legally allowed to do so, could sell personal firearms.

But in the context of the current allegations, the number is still notable.

The key question is not whether Mayo ever sold guns to a pawn shop. The key question is whether the Taurus G3 was police evidence and whether Mayo had any legal right to sell it.

That is where the criminal case will have to focus.

It is also where the public concern comes in. People expect police evidence rooms to be boring, controlled, and tightly documented. No one expects evidence from a criminal case to show up in a pawn shop.

A Family Statement And A Reminder About Presumption Of Innocence

Lehto also discussed a statement released by Mayo’s father, Jerry Williams, who was identified in the report as the Democratic nominee for Lake County sheriff.

Williams said the family was deeply concerned by the allegations and struggling to reconcile them with the values they had tried to instill.

He also said Mayo is presumed innocent unless and until proven otherwise.

Lehto praised that wording.

He said he appreciated that Williams did not rush out claiming his son was being framed or railroaded. Instead, the statement respected the legal process while acknowledging the seriousness of the accusations.

Lehto said he especially liked the phrase “unless and until proven guilty,” because it better captures the presumption of innocence than the more common phrase “innocent until proven guilty,” which can sometimes sound as if guilt is expected later.

That distinction may seem small, but it matters in cases like this.

The allegations are dramatic, and many people hearing them will likely have an immediate reaction. But as Lehto reminded viewers, a defendant is innocent at the start of trial. The government still has to prove its case.

Why This Case Hits A Nerve

The reason this story is so striking is not just that a police chief has been charged.

It is that the alleged conduct goes directly to public trust.

A police department’s evidence system depends on people inside the department following rules even when no one is watching. If evidence can be removed and sold, then defendants, victims, prosecutors, and the public all have reason to worry.

Lehto did not declare Mayo guilty. He repeatedly framed the case as a set of allegations that must still be handled in court.

But he also made clear that the accusations are unusually serious.

If investigators prove that a police chief took a gun being held as evidence and sold it for cash, then this is not just a workplace misconduct case. It becomes a story about power, accountability, and whether the rules are being followed by the very people entrusted to enforce them.

For now, as Lehto said, the legal process has to play out.

But the central allegation remains startling: a gun tied to a criminal case was supposed to be safely held by police, and investigators say it instead ended up at a local pawn shop.