Get Second Opinion On Festering Case
Clarification In response to last Thursday’s editorial, Spokane City Attorney James Sloane said it was not a city attorney but rather an attorney for the county who oversaw execution of a 1986 search at some local Gypsies’ homes. That same day, however, Assistant City Attorney Rocco Treppiedi was among the authorities involved as items seized in search were processed down at the police station. The manner in which those items were handled, then and later, became a major provocation of the Gypsies’ subsequent lawsuit.
One by one, city of Spokane officials reported to the City Council this week that they had investigated themselves and had concluded that their conduct in raiding a CBS news crew was legal and altogether okey-dokey.
The only counterpoint to this happy chorus was City Manager Roger Crum’s concession that Assistant City Attorney Rocco Treppiedi had made an error in judgment. Crum hastened to add, however, that Treppiedi violated no policy and had “a rational basis” for getting the city in a rather spectacular mess.
My, what a rigorous exercise in self-scrutiny this was.
Sure, Mayor Jack Geraghty has sent a written apology to CBS.
But as far as public interests are concerned, the city still needs a way to regain its perspective in the Gypsy litigation which gave rise to this uproar.
The city can’t do that so long as Treppiedi remains lead attorney in charge of the Gypsy case.
Way back in 1986 Treppiedi gave legal advice to police when they raided homes of some local Gypsies. Courts have ruled the searches were illegal. Treppiedi strongly disagrees, to this day. And to this day, he has been allowed to defend the city in the $40 million lawsuit Gypsies brought, for violation of their civil rights in the illegal searches.
Treppiedi should not have been assigned to the case in the first place, given his involvement in the lawsuit’s provocation.
The issue isn’t whether some court will vindicate Treppiedi, or the searches. The issue before the court is how much money taxpayers must pay the Gypsies in damages. With Treppiedi at the helm, court-ordered efforts to settle the case have proved fruitless, while legal bills soared.
Then came Treppiedi’s decision to raid the CBS crew, for videotape of a fracas among some of the Gypsies. The raid, as the city now admits, was unnecessary and a mistake. Treppiedi could have sought the tape by other means but instead placed the city - that’s us, taxpayers - at risk of another expensive lawsuit, by CBS.
The taxpayers would be better served if the Gypsy case were assigned to an attorney who has no personal stake in it. Given the amount already spent fighting the case and the amount at risk in a verdict, the City Council would be wise to hire an outside lawyer who can offer a truly independent perspective. No, a crony of the city’s staff lawyers would not be acceptable.
City officials need to make an impartial business decision about what’s best, in this case, for the taxpayers. Such a decision requires outside professional advice.