Spokane7
56°
January 10, 2012 in City
Sullivan should just bask in her one-hit glory
So the big recall petition against Spokane County Prosecuting Attorney Steve Tucker was booted out of court like an unwelcome party crasher.
Boy, who could’ve seen that one coming?
Wait a second. I know who saw that coming.
It’s not in my modest nature to gloat, but …
TOLD YA SO!
Now if only my gifts for prediction translated to lottery numbers and Kentucky Derby winners.
Truth is, no Kreskin powers were needed to see through Shannon Sullivan’s Tucker recall.
It was, as I opined early last month, “a misguided waste of time, energy and perspiration.”
And that’s being kind.
What was Sullivan thinking? Or rather, was she thinking at all?
Craig Matheson, visiting Superior Court judge from counties Benton and Franklin, deftly dismantled Sullivan’s petition last Friday with the ease of a shade tree mechanic yanking the carburetor off a ’62 Chevy.
Judge Matheson ruled that “four recall charges were insufficient and that one of the four lacked a basis of knowledge,” according to our news account.
The petition didn’t contain a fortune cookie’s worth of common sense. Even worse, some of Sullivan’s accusations against Tucker amounted to hearsay and untruth.
Take the charge stemming from a 2006 campaign promise Tucker made to not prosecute public employees.
It’s undocumented scuttlebutt, based on what some city councilman supposedly heard Tucker say.
I’ve heard better rumors over drinks in a murky bar.
Plus, as the judge pointed out, Tucker has been re-elected twice since this dubious utterance.
Fact is, Tucker HAS prosecuted public employees, which makes the accusation ludicrous.
I’ve devoted a lot of words over the years to Tucker’s imperfections, failings and nonexistent work ethic. He’s one of the weakest prosecutors we’ve ever had, as far as I’m concerned.
His ongoing inaction regarding the Spokane Police Department assault on Otto Zehm is inexcusable.
Yet the voters keep putting this loser back into office.
I’d take it personally if it weren’t for the way our American system works.
Voters have never placed much of a premium on quality control. Oh yeah, we talk big all the time about cleaning house. But being a boob incumbent is about the safest job on the planet.
Sullivan’s ill-conceived effort to bring Tucker down did accomplish one thing that I thought was impossible.
She actually made me feel sorry for the guy.
True, my sympathy for Tucker is similar to the slight twinge I felt for that giant, acid-drooling insect at the end of the movie “Alien.” You know, when Sigourney Weaver sent the poor monster hurtling into the dark vacuum of space.
What can I say? I’m not made of stone.
I didn’t know what to make of Sullivan’s reaction after Judge Matheson had punctured her balloon.
“I’m OK with the decision,” she said.
Are you kidding me?
Getting shot down in court should evoke a more emotional response than that.
Sullivan, of course, is best known for launching the successful recall against the late Spokane Mayor Jim West.
She had the right idea at the right moment. West’s Internet sexcapades, his illegal, romance-based job offers disgraced the community.
When West refused to budge, this woman got things rolling.
By law, Sullivan has 15 days to appeal Judge Matheson’s ruling.
So here’s some more free legal advice.
Don’t.
Pack it up. Put the petition away.
Go back to whatever you were doing before having your head turned by this monumentally crummy idea.
Shannon Sullivan had a good idea once and it wound up making Spokane a better place.
That should be enough for anyone.
Doug Clark is a columnist for The Spokesman-Review. He can be reached at (509) 459-5432 or by email at dougc@spokesman.com.
Recent stories by Doug Clark
Idaho vodka ban cocktail of bad judgment May 31, 2012 2- Doug Clark: Roskelley’s candidacy is all downhill from here May 27, 2012 15
- Clark: No clear inspiration for ‘Spokane Motel Blues’ May 24, 2012 6
- Professor’s ‘Motel’ mystery needs you to solve it May 22, 2012
- Clark: City ordinance shows lack of sound thinking May 20, 2012 21
ChefGus/ John Olsen on January 10 at 4:43 a.m.
Doug… While perhaps all the Legalities preclude the procession of the push to get Mr Tucker out of office… He is easily one of the worst County Prosecutor’s that we have ever had. He is the third leg of the stool we call the legal system and is not present.. leaving a very precarious seat to sit lady justice. Many of us tried to get him out of office at the ballot box, but it did not work.
Shannon Sullivan at least had the guts to follow the courage of her convictions, and go after this incomprehensibly re elected non functioning government official. It got the nefarious things that Mr Tucker has done in full view before the public’s eye. That in my view was/is an important thing to do. I think the upcoming federal investigation will help us on that topic. The largest part of Mr Tucker’s job is to defend the Constitution of the United States and he has abrogated that responsibility. John
MrBloggy on January 10 at 6:19 a.m.
MrBloggy believes if half baked affronts to the local power structure, relying on inadequate facts, overheated opinions, pure rumors and gossip, and delivered in ill-conceived and poorly executed writing was a reason to quit - well it must be time to get Doug’s retirement party planning team together.
And to think poor Shannon is maligned and she’s got an enviable batting average of .500. Clark has enough execrable columns under his tan Hager expandable waist slacks to paper a football field holding a herd of elephants suffering from explosive diarrhea and inchoate drooling.
Ron_the_Cop on January 10 at 6:22 a.m.
Doug,
I’m with ChefGus. Shannon had the courage to do what many sheep in this town are too scared to do - tell truth to power. For that I’m very proud of her. Mr. Tucker has now been exposed in public - the emperor wears no clothes.
Just say’n Doug - I will tell you so eventually:-) It’s time for the peasants AKA WE THE PEOPLE to storm the Bastille and throw out our elected who fail us in their oaths of office to WE THE PEOPLE.
There was a long discussion on this topic in the article by Prager. Here’s some of my key thoughts:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/jan/07/tucker-recall-effort-tossed/?comments#c394235
Mr. Tucker IMO is inept, incompetent, lazy, possibly a drunkard, arrogant. I could go on. This appears to be well known in the legal community. One of my sources who is in the media clued me in to Mr. Tucker’s watering holes
Mr. Tucker skated on the recall by the skin of his teeth. Mr. Tucker’s attorney did an excellent job in papering over the real issues. I am very proud of Shannon and will commend her for her courage to stand up. Shannon knew from her common sense perspective that something is was wrong here. Shannon was out gunned by Tucker’s mouthpiece. . .
… Mr. Tucker is not an idle player and must take a backseat while waiting for a LE referral. That’s the problem all along with all these cases - garbage in and garbage out. Of course there will be insufficient evidence to charge when LE low balls the investigation e.g., Zehm, Savage, Creach (Not criminal though), the Ross case and perhaps the Dodd case.
MO Mr. Tucker was lying through his teeth when he said the feds took the Zehm case away from him in July of 06. US Attorney Jim McDevitt in as much said so when the indictment came down. Mr. Tucker was dithering on the Zehm case all the way into Oct of 06. When Mr. Tucker said there appeared to be insufficient evidence to charge the feds then expanded their initial investigation to a full blown investigation in a real search for the truth. And Mr. Tucker is now trying to hide under the skirts of the feds. See Mr. Tucker’s declaration filed in response to the recall (http://tinyurl.com/6n4gdgm). . .
Mr. Tucker is trying to justify his inaction under the discretion of his office. HOWEVER one small detail as outlined under the RCWs regarding the responsibility of a county prosecutor - shall ensure that a thorough factual investigation has been conducted before a decision to prosecute is made.
This is where Mr. Tucker fails miserably and has allowed these and other cases to slide. He has violated his oath of office by not doing his duties and responsibilities as charged with by the … RCW 9.94A.411
o_pleez on January 10 at 8:08 a.m.
Ron the cop - -
“I’m with ChefGus. Shannon had the courage to do what many sheep in this town, INCLUDING MYSELF, are too scared to do - tell truth to power. For that I’m very proud of her. Mr. Tucker has now been exposed in public - the emperor wears no clothes.
––––––––––––––––––––––––-
Fixed it for you.
Ron_the_Cop on January 10 at 8:27 a.m.
@O Pleez,
Thanks I think;-) Yes I was a little strong on this but how to you wake up the masses in the face of evil within our midst?
D Statler on January 10 at 8:34 a.m.
The Emperors clothes were scantily clad (at best) during the last election cycle. I was very surprised he was re-elected. I will be speechless if it should happen again. The recall was a valliant effort. I wish it was as easy as sweeping up a mess and disposing of it. I would have been qualified to lead the effort. Voting Tucker out at the next election cycle is the answer. So easy a janitor can do it ! :^)
Ron_the_Cop on January 10 at 8:44 a.m.
D. Statler,
My sources say he won’t run and will resign early to get his heir apparent appointed.
My point is that we can’t as taxpayers afford another three years of Mr. Tucker in office. The Zehm case will cost about $10M dollars, the other cases coming done the pike will costs millions of scarce dollars more.
ramunrud on January 10 at 10:07 a.m.
Douglas your wit and sarcasm, sharp as ever,, was evoking. It brought Diogenes to mind with his angry rantings as he told Alexander to step out of his sunlight. What was the last brave thing you did? Your column this time was as distasteful as Diogenes masturbating in public. She had the guts to do what everyone else was whining about. If she would have won all the rats would have come out to bask in the glory of her success saying I was behind her all the way. Most people want someone else to take all the risk but they are first in line to take credit when in fact they were hiding the whole time………Sometimes you sound like a barking dog in love with the sound of his own voice.
The_Seer on January 10 at 12:16 p.m.
Mr. Bloggy is pretty funny today. Does anyone ever use the positive form “choate?”
generallyspeaking on January 10 at 5:13 p.m.
@Ron….maybe YOU need to claim that “sheep” status…after all wasn’t it you that was too afraid to put your name on that recall request?? Yup you hid in the wings sending her into the courtroom knowing full well she did not have a chance in hell……wasn’t it YOU that manipulated her into doing your dirty work….Ya…thinking you need to go by the moniker…..dirty sheep….and I think we ALL know Tucker didn’t beat this by the skin of his teeth…You set her up for failure, let her take the hit…while you hid behind your computer…..quite cowardly isn’t it????
??Riddler?? on January 10 at 5:43 p.m.
?? generallyspeaking ??
?? what’s that sound we hear from RTC and his Crew ??
?? Meeeeeeoooooow ??
DPA on January 10 at 5:49 p.m.
Mr. Wright,
“Storm the Bastille”? Really? I guess I’ll ask the question. How many women and kids will you push in front of you so you can “lead from the rear” as you did with the recall petition?
Then you talk about waking up the masses to confront “evil”. Are you being a little hysterical?
Then finally you mention you are a concerned taxpayer and these decisions are going to cost millions. As I’ve said before, this responsibility to the taxpayers is only for others isn’t it? You cost the rest of us taxpayers a bunch of money with this recall that was on a fast track to nowhere. How about footing the bill for this?
Storming the Bastille and confronting evil in our midst. Everyone meet Ron Wright, Spokane’s very own Walter Mitty.
brianrbreen on January 10 at 8:40 p.m.
@DPA
“Everyone meet Ron Wright, Spokane’s very own Walter Mitty.”
Were you able to get this in under the hearsay exception?
D Statler on January 10 at 8:43 p.m.
@ DPA, My family continues to pay for actions taken and not taken by your office. I would be careful to cast stones when you too live in a glass house. The policies and practices excersized by Steve Tuckers crew are far from savory. When all you are concerned about is convictions. Justice,moral and legal are put on the shelf. I don’t see too many of you DPAs stepping out front to help lead and fix things in your control either.
I being a janitor would love to come into your office and clean house.Being one willing to listen,review and exercise sound judgement. I believe that even a janitor could do a better job of leading you. Let me know if you need my services. I will be happy to help for free. You know how to get my phone number.
DPA on January 10 at 9:03 p.m.
Brian,
More like judicial notice.
brianrbreen on January 10 at 9:06 p.m.
@DPA
You are having too much fun. Lawyers are supposed to be a serious lot aren’t they?
DPA on January 10 at 9:10 p.m.
Brian,
Only at work.
brianrbreen on January 10 at 9:12 p.m.
@DPA
BTW; I left you with a heck of an opening there…thought you would take it (803 (21), just because this thing is kinda funny to me… probably because I’m a bit daft.
DPA on January 10 at 9:32 p.m.
Brian,
Got it. Guess I’m a little slow tonight. You’re right, that is pretty funny.
brianrbreen on January 10 at 9:54 p.m.
@DPA
The whole thing is funny…. Ron is doing his thing, you are doing your thing, and Riddler and generallyspeaking are jumping on your train and if Ron were to ever find out the only reason Steve passed the bar was because I took it for him then what?
Just kidding Ron……. honest.
mary1958 on January 11 at 12:54 a.m.
I want Shannon Sullivan to run for Mayor next go round. It might be a stretch to have her apply for Police Chief but I’ll give her points for having the character and extended intestinal fortitude. I don’t understand why you would want to be so caustic about her attempt when you YOURSELF have said that Tucker has, “…imperfections, failings, non-existent work ethic..weakest prosecutor(s)…inaction regarding….Otto Zehm is inexcusable.” Not only that but the voters keep putting him back in office and you are, what?, stunned and, what?… unhappy? Okay, Doug, she didn’t succeed and your ego wants to tell her so in bright, glaring typed characters in the city newspaper. Personally, she’s my heroine!
brianrbreen on January 11 at 6:44 a.m.
@mary1958
I don’t think Shannon Sullivan’s motivation was anything other than a since of civic duty and I very much admire her for that. I just wish there would have been considerably more thought put into the effort she was pursuing. Despite what many may think I personally feel she may have accomplished more than she realizes not only from the standpoint of Tucker possibly having to take a serious look at things, but also from the standpoint of making the public aware of how important it is to carefully consider who we vote for in that position and just exactly how powerful the position of prosecutor is.
Ron Wright and DPA can battle it out here, each with their own very cogent points but when you try and pick winners or losers in this mess the real winners are the community no matter the cost because down the road I guarantee you in the next election the word “Recall” will come up time and again and hopefully will get people thinking about their vote. For that thank you Shannon Sullivan.
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 10:04 a.m.
Doug,
Doug you’re giving me cognitive dissonance. On one hand you’re freely saying Mr. Tucker is the worst prosecutor we’ve had but on the other hand you will demean Shannon for bringing this action.
Oh OK I get it your column was a very deep tongue and cheek reflection of Spokane’s the body public:-)
@Brian and Marie1958,
Thank you for speaking to the real issues facing our community because of Mr. Tucker’s inaction. IMO Mr. Tucker has abdicated his sworn duties and responsibilities of his office to WE THE PEOPLE. This is NOT a matter of simple prosecutorial discretion but there is IMO a clear pattern and practice that has evolved over many cases. This doesn’t involve just one case. Mr. Tucker’s inaction will cost WE THE TAXPAYERS many millions of dollars once these problematic OIS/OIDs work their way through the courts.
Brian re the allegation of Mr. Tucker’s standing up Judge Hayes a source has told me there is more to this case as you suggested. Yes Judge Hayes may have her own issues but this doesn’t justify Mr. Tucker display of disrespect to the court and rule of law e.g., the SPD salute in federal court. Notwithstanding Judge Hayes et al if Mr. Tucker brokered this deal and Mr. Garvin couldn’t explain the deal then it was a bad PR move on his part. Mr. Tucker should have showed up and or gave a better public announcement why this plea deal was such a good deal.
I will say it one more time it was SHANNON’S CHOICE to be the sole signer on the recall petition. Former Sheriff Tony Bamonte and I are not hiding under her skirts and pushing her out as canon fodder. Both the Sheriff and I would have happily signed the petition as well as several other people. A recall is a fundamental constitutional right of every citizen when an officer holder fails in his/her sworn duties to the people.
A recall is not a legal action but a political one as Mr. Tucker’s attorney adroitly sidestepped in his oral arguments inferring there must be a criminal showing. In WA unlike many other states there must be a prima facie showing first to screen out frivolous actions. A key difference in a recall unlike a legal action is that the voters are the jury and the burden of proof is a vote of 50% plus one in the recall election. Shannon’s petition was not frivolous by any means and has nothing in common with the Piece County case (Lindquist) that Mr. Tucker’s attorney made a number of references to.
IMO the Mr. Tucker’s attorney’s oral argument was well made but did not address the RCW section (RCW 9.94A.411) on point that puts limits on a prosecutors discretion by charging a prosecutor with - SHALL ensure that a complete and thorough criminal investigation be done BEFORE making a filing decision (See my cite above). This is where I’m calling foul. This is what came out during the Thompson trial - there was an overt criminal cover up by LE and local officials to conceal this crime to avoid civil liability.
Mr. Tucker either did know or should have known this before concluding there was insufficient evidence to file in Oct of 06. The enhanced video was available by then which he had access to review. The video stands along on its face. IMO Mr. Tucker et al did not ask the hard questions as he is charged with under RCW 9.94A.411 of LE’s investigation into the Zehm death.
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 10:14 a.m.
Brian and Mara1958,
I will again commend Shannon for have the courage to launch this action. Whether she decides to appeal I don’t know. HOWEVER in any event her action has put Mr. Tucker in the public spotlight. Hopefully Shannon’s effort sent a strong message to Mr. Tucker he needs to clean up his act. Perhaps Mr. Tucker should join AA if appropriate, play less golf and spend more time in the office.
Sorry if I call B R A V O S I E R R A of Mr. Tucker’s efforts to hide under the skirts of the feds for his inaction on the Zehm death.
As I will detail in a post to follow.
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 10:45 a.m.
Brian an Mary1958,
I will apologize in advance for this lengthy post but this is a very complex issue of nuances of the broad prosecutorial discretion granted to the prosecutor in deciding whether to bring criminal charges or not. This grant of discretion isn’t a carte blanche grant of authority by WE THE PEOPLE. This discretion is limited and tempered by RCW 9.94A.411
IMO this is how the game is played locally in all of these problematic LE cases. These investigations are “low balled” by LE either knowingly and or from lack of experience and then handed off for review to Mr. Tucker without filing recommendation. In some of these cases aided by the destruction/altering of evidence are tanked. In part facilitated IMO by government counsel in the Ross and Zehm cases that should know better - Roco Treppiedi. If I were Mr. Treppiedi I would be nervous of whether I was in the federal gun sights for obstruction of justice.
Mr. Tucker then conveniently rules there is insufficient evidence to warrant a criminal filing of criminal charges. Of course there will always be insufficient evidence to file if the criminal investigation was poorly done. In the Savage manslaughter case where Mr. Tucker refused to file both Sheriff Bamonte and I have an overabundance of evidence to prove this is what Mr. Tucker did and exposes how the game is played.
Mr. Tucker failed to do anything once the feds gave the Savage case back to him with the charge to review it under state law involving negligent homicide. Yes I know there was a WA AG review of Mr. Tucker’s evidence he received from the feds. In the manner Mr. Tucker referred this case to the AG’s Office, Mr. Tucker stacked the deck. The WA AG’s Office kept its blinders on and in essence gave Mr. Tucker political cover to dismiss this case. NO COMPLETE AND THOROUGH CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION was ever done even though LE officials and Mr. Tucker say otherwise.
The feds after Mr. Tucker announced there appeared to be insufficient evidence to file (Circa Oct 06) found differently in the Zehm case. The feds then launched a full blown investigation from their low level review that was going on that Mayor Hession let the cat out of the bag in July 06. My sources say the the feds were waiting to see if Mr. Tucker would act. Mr. Tucker’s claim that that the feds took this case away from him in July 06 is totally fallacious and disingenuous and I call B R A V O S I E R R A!
The feds did their job, they played hardball and impaneled a federal grand jury much to the angst and trepidation of the local LE farm league players, they got a federal grand jury indictment and did get a jury conviction for a fed criminal civil rights violation (CRV). The burden of proof for a federal CRV is far greater to prove beyond a reasonable doubt than state charges that Mr. Tucker could have filed that both former County Prosecutors Brockett and Sweetser have stated. Of course this would have been after a complete and thorough criminal investigation was done.
This is what Mr. Tucker failed to ensure was done as charged by RCW 9.94A.411. Whether these problematic cases were criminal is debatable. In the Creach case I don’t believe it was criminal but there are very clear mistakes made by LE that led to this tragic shooting. By Mr. Tucker’s inaction LE and government counsel are allowed to deny mistakes are made to limit civil liability. This precludes full and complete transparent investigations in a search for the truth that would reveal mistakes were made. The downside is that real changes in police policy, procedure an training are done to limit the risk of future similar incidents.
generallyspeaking on January 11 at 11:42 a.m.
@Ron….everyone knows you sent Sullivan into the shark tank alone….KNOWING the recall petition would fail….hence you were afraid to put your name on it… Or maybe you were afraid to do it yourself because you are afraid of something about you being exposed? I don’t know…that would be my guess…you manipulated her, and she is not bright enough to realize it…..knowing the petition would fail…but put a bug in the citizens ear was your intent wasn’t it? Sounds like you have an ax to grind with Mr. Tucker, but too afraid to address it yourself….sounds like a bunch of sour grapes….and Sullivan was your lackey…..
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 12:29 p.m.
Generallyspeaking,
If you want to have a reasonable intelligent discussion I’m game. If all you want to do is throw stones go ahead but I won’t be your entertainment.
I answered your challenge above and in other threads that I’m not hiding in Shannon skirts and or put her out front as canon fodder. If you don’t believe what I said that’s fine but this is the truth.
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 12:31 p.m.
Generallyspeaking,
If you want to have a reasonable intelligent discussion I’m game. If all you want to do is throw stones go ahead but I won’t be your entertainment.
I answered DPA’s and your challenge above and in other threads that I’m hiding behind Shannon skirts and or put her out front as canon fodder. If you don’t believe what I said that’s fine but this is the truth.
Mr. Tucker is the one ducking and I will call him out whenever possible.
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 12:36 p.m.
Sorry for the double post. I got a server rejection message from the first post so I assumed it didn’t go through.
generallyspeaking on January 11 at 12:46 p.m.
No game here, no throwing stones….just calling a spade a spade… letting you know anyone that knows anything about the recall petition sees right through you….and I am not the only one with that opinion…..but I think you know that….and really? Don’t think you want to play the “intelligent” conversation card….You might have been able to manipulate Sullivan….but she is the only one.
generallyspeaking on January 11 at 12:51 p.m.
and you REALLY should stop representing yourself as a “Cop”….you are NOT one….maybe a half of a century ago you were….but you’re not one anymore….no one cares about the past…..harsh…but true…
EthicsinLE on January 11 at 2:21 p.m.
Looks like ron the EX cop and cohorts gave Shannon the Kool Aid and she drank it. Ron has no credibility, he refuses to sign under penalty of perjury any of the complaints he has filed with SPD and SCSO. He helped write Shannons “complaint”, but refused to sign it. Ron wants to feel needed somehow and finds a conspiracy in everything. I have some fun Ron facts I can post that might shed light on his credibility and integrity.
generallyspeaking on January 11 at 3:16 p.m.
PLEASE do Ethics….pretty sure i am spot on in my thoughts of his credibility….
generallyspeaking on January 11 at 3:38 p.m.
@Ethics…just did a little research myself…watched him on UTube at Nov 11 city council meeting….as well as found other documentation…Yup, my thoughts were confirmed….Just wondering why he doesn’t use the handle Rocketsbrain anymore???
generallyspeaking on January 11 at 4:00 p.m.
OMG….it gets funnier….just found online a letter from the city attorney sent to him……Ya…no credibility…..
??Riddler?? on January 11 at 6:15 p.m.
?? generallyspeaking, DPA and EthicsinLE ??
?? Can we creat a new bit of terminology, i.e. “Cali-Cop”
Cali-Cop (noun) a retired policeman who abandons the warmth of the California sun to spend his miserable winters in Spokane, trolling the blogs.
Cali-Copping (verb) to fixate upon a topic, posting endlessly, with gratuitous inclusions of one’s curriculum vitae.
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 7:21 p.m.
@Generallyspeaking,
Why all this effort to kill the messenger? IMO the evidence and analysis I posted above stands alone on its face. This is not about my credibility. Those who read it are free to decide if there is any truth here.
Ethics in LE is telling tales out of church that Sheriff Knezovich may find embarrassing. In the Creach OIS I did file a formal complaint re the SPD investigation with the SO and SPD Ombudsman Tim Burns. And yes both former Sheriff Bamonte and I have filed previous complaints with Tim Burns on former Chief Kirkpatrick for failing to act on serious felonies.
I don’t believe the Creach OIS was criminal in nature but there are major issues that must be addressed to prevent future such incidents. As you know the Creach family has filed a federal civil rights case (Civil not criminal as in Zehm). I doubt their attorneys would have proceeded if there wasn’t substantial grounds for launching this action.
If Ethics in LE is inferring his statement, “I have some fun Ron facts I can post that might shed light on his credibility and integrity,” to something that Sheriff Knezovich possesses from the Creach case, I would suggest he discuss this with the Sheriff first. This may become an issue in the Creach civil suit. I would be happy to post this if he wants.
As to the other current SO IA complaint, yes it is true I did not sign a formal complaint. In fact I refused to as this information was about certain alleged criminal activity. There is no statutory requirement that anyone sign a complaint first before a LE agency can investigate what if found true could be a felony. I have a formal client relationship did make a complaint and was not satisfied with the SO’s unfounding of his/her complaint. This client retained me to pursue this complaint as it was unfounded based on an alleged inadequate IA investigation.
If Ethics in LE wishes to discuss this. I would be more than happy to do so as my client has given me discretion to disclose information. I made a commitment to the Sheriff I would not substantially reveal publicly details of this case and will continue to do so unless Ethics in LE wishes to push this issue.
As to the letter posted on the Internet from City Attorney Delaney, you should check first who posted it. It was me that posted the letter from Mr. Delaney as the result of former Chief Kirkpatrick accusing me of libeling her. Chief Kirkpatrick took something out of context and then accused me of libeling her. I wrote both Chief Kirkpatrick and Mr. Delaney that I would be happy to make a correction if I was in error and would make a public apology. To this date they have never responded and or retracted this accusation.
All this stems from City of Spokane CFO Gavin Cooley using the title of CPA after his name on the City’s Website inadvertently since 2006 when he let his CPA license expire. This later extended to my filing of PDRs in the Creach OIS. The State Board of Accountancy did open a complaint re Mr. Cooley but later ruled this was an oversight and declined to take any further action. I believe differently but since Mr. Cooley is no longer a CPA this is somewhat moot now. My compliant is linked to in this piece as also is Mr. Delaney’s letter you are citing. I suggest you read this as it gives the context in which Mr. Delaney sent this letter. Also please consider I may not be the wingnut as some folks have accused me. Perhaps you watched episodes of Lt. Columbo? IMO Mr. Delaney was CYA’g:
Mayor Verner kicks the Otto Zehm death cover up down the road again http://tinyurl.com/3h49dgd
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 7:28 p.m.
@Generallyspeaking,
If you’re going to call me a conspiracy theorist and or wingnut that’s fine. I would say I am in good company - former Sheriff Tony Bamonte, CFJ Communications Director Tim Connor, Investigative Reporter Larry Shook, Former KXLY Reporter Tom Grant, Former KHQ Reporter Randy Shaw now KREM Anchor, former Spokane Mayor John Talbott, former City Councilperson Cheri Rodgers and there are many more.
And finally I retired in September 2005. I guess I’m a dinosaur but I am less ancient than Brian Breen. Sorry if I continue to be a sheepdog watching over the flock (http://www.killology.com/sheep_dog.htm). I don’t much care for other sheepdogs that have lost their teeth and or turned on the flock they are charged with protecting. It’s engrained in me:-)
Throw all the stones you wish. Could we keep this thread on the subject of Mr. Tucker and not me?
generallyspeaking on January 11 at 7:37 p.m.
Ah Ron….I’m not calling you a wingnut…but if you wish to categorize yourself as such I wont argue….I think a narcissist is more fitting tho….but we can compromise…. a narcissistic wingnut
Ron_the_Cop on January 11 at 7:43 p.m.
lol ;-)
brianrbreen on January 11 at 7:55 p.m.
@??Riddler??
“?? generallyspeaking, DPA and EthicsinLE ??”
I think DPA has a lot more class and smarts then to get sucked into this.
Me…. not so much.
@Ron_the_Cop
“I am less ancient than Brian Breen.”
Now that was real nice! :)
??Riddler?? on January 11 at 8:34 p.m.
?? Do you mind if I submit “Cali-Cop” to Urban Dictionary ??
brianrbreen on January 11 at 8:52 p.m.
If you are asking me…I don’t care what you put in the Urban Dictionary. But I thought they limited to one submission a day, and I know you already put this one in earlier.
Californicator 15 up, 23 down
Brown-nosers from California who move up to Washington State and take away jobs from locals and destroy everything in their path, including companies, the enviroment, and the lives of the inocent natives. An on going problem since 1989. See Caliprick or Throne Warmer.
That Joel guy sure has Californicated our cute little ski area !
4203 on January 11 at 9:07 p.m.
Sullivan did the exact right thing to file the recall pedition.
And after meeting several times with Ron, my view is that he is a tremendously talented, honest, and ethical inviidual. Ron’s observations regarading Prosecutor Tucker et al are based on careful fact checking and are sound. Generaly speaking - I challenge you to review these recall issues either with former Sheriff Bamonte or Ron - in person. These two guys have documented the dismal poor performance of our local LE. Reminds me of how Churchill was marganilized prior to WWII; even Ronald Reagan prior to his election. Messangers are often marginalized - however in hindsight should be taken seriously. Thank you Ron and Sheriff Bamonte for your service to our disfunctional LE community.
misjustice on January 12 at 8:19 p.m.
@ Ron and Brian, you guys must be doin’ something right; you sure tick off generallyspeaking/nosheet/justme09/riddler. Which is good enough for me!
; )
Ron_the_Cop on January 12 at 10:58 p.m.
lol;-) thx Ms. Justy.
??Riddler?? on January 13 at 1:54 p.m.
?? How about “Cali-Copulation” ??
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 9:17 a.m.
WHO let Misjustice out of the nut house again????
brianrbreen on January 14 at 9:52 a.m.
@generallyspeaking/justme09
I’m not clear on your last post regarding @misjustice. Are you taking a shot at me or her?
misjustice on January 14 at 10:17 a.m.
See what I mean, Brian?
; )
brianrbreen on January 14 at 10:23 a.m.
@misjustice
I see what you mean. I only wanted to clarify, as to whether it was directed at me or you.
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 11:03 a.m.
@Brian….everything is NOT about you….however, since you chimed in….interestingly enough….in a conversation I was having recently with someone about the posters on SR…I met an old classmate of yours…..OMG…I have NEVER laughed SO hard at the things I was told….NOW things ALL make sense…..apparently what a tool you were in school….i guess some things never change….just a poor fat kid, who was always the last one picked…
brianrbreen on January 14 at 11:11 a.m.
@generallyspeaking
I guess some would say that’s an accurate description. Never got picked for anything, had a pretty irrelevant high school career, just like my SPD career. I never amounted to much of anything. Beyond that no guts on my question above?
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 11:15 a.m.
Oh I answered your question…NOT everything is about YOU….very accurate description, the stuff I was told was HILARIOUS….and we do actually agree on something…you never amounted to anything…
brianrbreen on January 14 at 11:18 a.m.
@generallyspeaking
You could at least give me credit for the fact that I graduated high school, and didn’t get fired from the SPD like some.
brianrbreen on January 14 at 11:20 a.m.
@generallyspeaking
I take it that your lack of fortitude, results from the fact you realized you got caught again.
brianrbreen on January 14 at 11:37 a.m.
@generallyspeaking
Look I don’t want to get into a battle of wits with you I’d be at a real disadvantage. You have to admit though at least during my irrelevant SPD career my personnel file didn’t look like this.
http://media.spokesman.com/documents/2011/07/Harvey_Letter_071311.pdf
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 12:29 p.m.
Caught at?…..Can’t really, “catch” me at anything….the letter you posted…..umm so? Just wish I knew someone at SPD….would ask em about you….somehow I think your reputation would be the same as your school rep….
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 12:30 p.m.
your still irrelevant…
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 12:43 p.m.
Hmm….you must of went to get more ice cream….Not really sure what the Harvey document has to do with your ineptness…..but I bet Harvey will be the last one laughing when he gets his job back, on top of win his millions of dollars law suit…..
brianrbreen on January 14 at 12:50 p.m.
@generallyspeaking
Just so I have it straight, it is irrelevant and inept…right? Anything else?
misjustice on January 14 at 2:17 p.m.
@ Brian, man, he’s got it bad for you!
; )
Could it possibly have anything to do with that newspaper photo of you in your leisure suit and stash?
brianrbreen on January 14 at 2:33 p.m.
@misjustice
I’m sure it has something to do with something much later than that. Amazing isn’t it how an irrelevant, inept, fat kid could elicit some much hatred. I must have done something somewhere along the line that was relevant at least to generallyspeaking/justme09
I wonder how Lewis is doing?
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 3:51 p.m.
I don’t hate you Brian…..after the stories i heard….just pity u…actually felt kind of bad I am so hard on you….but that didn’t last long….in order for me to hate you…it would mean you or anything you say would have to have significance to me…and how can so much hot air really be significant?….back to being irrelevant for the poor fat kid….
brianrbreen on January 14 at 4:01 p.m.
@generallyspeaking
I certainly appreciate that, thank you for feeling bad about being “so hard on” me, actually you wouldn’t be the first. I’m glad I’m back to being irrelevant. I was a little worried about you being “so hard on” me.
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 4:27 p.m.
No problem Brian…but don’t forget…the pity for u…
misjustice on January 14 at 4:33 p.m.
I think that it’s leisure suit envy, Brian. And that she could never grow a stash like you. But that’s just my theory. And as for being “hard on/for you”…well, I’ll just let that one alone.
I hope that Lewis is going to make a full recovery…maybe we will hear from him in a few days?
brianrbreen on January 14 at 4:40 p.m.
@misjustice
I hope we hear from Lewis soon also. I knew that wouldn’t go over your head as it did someone else.
generallyspeaking on January 14 at 4:51 p.m.
@misjustice….make up your mind…am I a he or a she?
Trust me Brian…didn’t go over my head…just bore me….Hey Brian…There goes the ice cream truck…RUN BRIAN RUN….
—hope ole Lewis is making a full recovery as well….
brianrbreen on January 14 at 5:36 p.m.
@generallyspeaking
Come to think of it during my high school years we had an old guy named Tony that had an ice cream cart that he parked outside of Lewis and Clark so I didn’t run after my ice cream. I’ve always wondered if the Aztecs would have had anything like that.
mary1958 on February 12 at 9:07 p.m.
Look who’s throwing around personality disorder terms (Narcissist) ––––-Leave Ron alone you bully. You, GS, like to distract the forum from the conversation by resorting to low end tactics. You know who Brian and Ron are why don’t you tell us all who you are? What is YOUR name–––-