WI Shooting Followup - Still in "Gag Order" mode


PDA






TexasRifleman
October 15, 2007, 10:11 AM
Unbelievable. Underage cop goes on rampage, then shoots himself 3 or 4 times in the head. Now orders not to talk.

What the heck is going on here? I threw away my tinfoil years ago, but I may go buy a roll after this, just in case I visit Wisconsin.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301704,00.html

MADISON, Wis. — The state's top law enforcement official is drawing criticism for encouraging the public not to answer reporters' questions about a north woods shooting by an off-duty sheriff's deputy that left seven dead, including the gunman.

Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen last week said law enforcers would not answer questions about the case in the city where it took place, and he relayed a request that Crandon residents ignore reporters asking questions. He then left the podium without taking questions.

A week after the shooting, authorities have released little or no information on autopsy findings, certain 911 calls made during a manhunt and crime-scene evidence. The crime is one state's biggest homicide cases, and in addition to being a deputy, the shooter was also a part-time officer on the Crandon police force.....(more)

....(cont)Still, the Wausau Daily Herald called Van Hollen's statement inappropriate. "No one has the authority to suggest that an entire community remain silent," read an editorial Friday.

Unanswered questions still abound, the editorial said, including what led to the suspect's death. "How did he end up with three pistol wounds to the head and a rifle wound to an arm?"

If you enjoyed reading about "WI Shooting Followup - Still in "Gag Order" mode" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ilbob
October 15, 2007, 10:15 AM
you are surprised by this? this is fairly typical when something like this happens. there is no transparency or openness when investigating potential LE misconduct. They need time to get their stories straight.

I can't even begin to imagine the fallout from this one. The $ stakes are huge.

S.P.E.C.T.R.E.
October 15, 2007, 10:19 AM
I still want to know if the AR-15 he used was his or the department's weapon. That question was brought up on the first day and I've yet to hear an answer.

TexasRifleman
October 15, 2007, 10:24 AM
you are surprised by this? this is fairly typical when something like this happens.

It's not fairly typical for officials to ask a whole town to ignore reporters, that's the one that struck me, especially after the actions on the day of the event where the mayor told everyone they "could not leave wherever they were" at the time.

ilbob
October 15, 2007, 10:28 AM
It's not fairly typical for officials to ask a whole town to ignore reporters, that's the one that struck me, especially after the actions on the day of the event where the mayor told everyone they "could not leave wherever they were" at the time.

I don't know what world you live in but it is very common for the authorities to "suggest" witnesses not talk about what they know. They are often threatened with obstruction or other charges if they don't comply with the "suggestion".

Exmasonite
October 15, 2007, 10:43 AM
wait... i haven't followed this story that closely but did you say:

"then shoots himself 3 or 4 times in the head"

was he really that bad of a shot? i find this hard to believe.

strangelittleman
October 15, 2007, 10:43 AM
L.E. misconduct? The only misconduct I've seen is from the rampaging nutjob. "IF" they placed 3 or 4 rounds in his skull, then so be it. Buy them lunch and be done with it! All law enforcement cringe when some "Officer Nutty McSquirrelturds" does something like this that makes all L.E.O.s look bad. His actions and actions of others like him only serve to break down the trust society has for law enforcement. When that trust breaks down and Joe Public can't come to his local L.E.Agency for help, or is in anyway scared, distrusting of them, then everything goes downhill from there.
I view it like this: All public officials should not think of themsleves as being in positions of power. They are in positions of trust and responsibility. they are entrusted with the responsibility of serving & protecting their fellow citizens. Period.
Having said that, if the nutjob created the violent situation and his continued hostile resistance resulted in his death, good, justice served.
$1.47 or so, of taxpayer's money spent on expended ammunition is better than keeping the nutjob up in the klink for the next 60+yrs at the tune of approx. $90-140 a day while his victims have no life and the victims' families are tormented for the rest of their lives as a result of his actions.

MASTEROFMALICE
October 15, 2007, 10:54 AM
On the flip side, since when did the press have a RIGHT to any information.

There is freedom of the press, and they have a right to print what they learn, but no citizen is required to provide them information. Sometimes the media seems to think they are entitled to a lot more then they are.

Deanimator
October 15, 2007, 11:31 AM
When that trust breaks down and Joe Public can't come to his local L.E.Agency for help, or is in anyway scared, distrusting of them, then everything goes downhill from there.

Welcome to the last 100+ years of the Chicago PD...

ilbob
October 15, 2007, 11:32 AM
On the flip side, since when did the press have a RIGHT to any information.

There is freedom of the press, and they have a right to print what they learn, but no citizen is required to provide them information. Sometimes the media seems to think they are entitled to a lot more then they are.
Good point. but since when do the authorities have any power to order anyone not to talk about anything (with a few exceptions)?

Deanimator
October 15, 2007, 11:32 AM
There is freedom of the press, and they have a right to print what they learn, but no citizen is required to provide them information.
And the ability of police and government to suppress public information is strictly circumscribed by the 1st Amendment... although some people either don't know or don't like that.

ilbob
October 15, 2007, 11:36 AM
When that trust breaks down and Joe Public can't come to his local L.E.Agency for help, or is in anyway scared, distrusting of them, then everything goes downhill from there.

Welcome to the last 100+ years of the Chicago PD
It may be a little unfair to compare generic PDs with the CPD. CPD has never really had the trust of the citizens it supposedly serves and protects. I suspect most PDs (outside of the really bad ones) have not lost that trust. CPD has always been either in bed with the mob (now it appears there is a strong gang influence in CPD - which is even scarier), or dominated by politicians for their own purposes, rather than the good of Chicago citizens in general.

The way the investigation in WI is going, it will be hard for the community to ever trust LE there again. It appears they are mostly interested in damage control, rather than dealing with any substantive issues that may be revealed by this situation.

ilbob
October 15, 2007, 11:39 AM
And the ability of police and government to suppress public information is strictly circumscribed by the 1st Amendment... although some people either don't know or don't like that.
I don't recall anything quite like that in 1A.

Thats why we need more FOIA type laws, ones that have real teeth in them for non-compliance, and that eliminate virtually all exemptions to the law, except for true privacy issues and true national defense issues.

better yet, online access to all public records. almost free, and no more excuses.

RoadkingLarry
October 15, 2007, 11:45 AM
By FOID do you mean Freedom of Information Act or firearms owner ID? 2 very differnet things. I'm just confused becaus there is not D in FOIA

AJ Dual
October 15, 2007, 11:48 AM
There's a lot of speculation that the screwy 911 and LEA response time-lines to the Crandon shootings was over the fact that they did not want to take him alive.

I can't say I totally disagree with that sentiment, if that's true.

However, it smells to me like that they did not want to take him alive over the various agencies own CYA concerns, and not simply "putting an end to things". And leaving the public at risk from the shooter that long to arrange his meeting with Jesus, self-inflicted or otherwise, was unconscionable.

Deanimator
October 15, 2007, 12:03 PM
It may be a little unfair to compare generic PDs with the CPD.
I note the history of the Chicago PD for two reasons:

1. Most PDs, especially smalltown PDs are as different from the Chicago PD as Mr. Rogers is from Charles Manson. I've lived in the town where I live since around 1999. There have been more serious acts of misconduct (of which I'm aware) in the Chicago PD in the last 12 months than there have in the Rocky River PD since I moved here. Why? I can't help but think that it's because nobody within or outside the Rocky River PD will TOLERATE that kind of behavior.

2. If you DON'T want your local PD to be like the Chicago PD, don't turn your head when bad things happen. Make sure that your local PD gets rid of its problem children, because as 100+ years of Chicago history shows, when you don't get rid of them, they end up running the show. And when you reach that point, the honest cops are irrelevant, because NOT being a crook becomes aberrant behavior.

Deanimator
October 15, 2007, 12:13 PM
I don't recall anything quite like that in 1A.

I'm talking about the ability of the police to strongarm you into not revealing embarassing or incriminating information. If somebody tries that crap with me, I'm off to the US Attorney's office like a flash.

Patrick "Scooter Libby" Fitzgerald has the Chicago PD in his jaws like a crocodile with an impala, and he's getting ready to roll...

ilbob
October 15, 2007, 12:35 PM
There have been more serious acts of misconduct (of which I'm aware) in the Chicago PD in the last 12 months than there have in the Rocky River PD since I moved here.
I think there is just more media hype than usual over the latest series of problems. I am not sure why there is more media attention this time around than any other year. CPD has a sorry history. There are bound to be some decent guys on the force, and you have to give them credit for sticking around, but you also have no way of telling who is who when the boys in blue show up.

If you DON'T want your local PD to be like the Chicago PD, don't turn your head when bad things happen. Make sure that your local PD gets rid of its problem children, because as 100+ years of Chicago history shows, when you don't get rid of them, they end up running the show. And when you reach that point, the honest cops are irrelevant, because NOT being a crook becomes aberrant behavior.
CPD's problems are political in nature, and will require political solutions. I don't believe anyone can come up with a single case where a rogue PD was brought in line by pressure from within. It always comes from outside pressure, and those cases are few and far between. In good departments, cops police each other and expect each other to behave, and for the most part they do. You have occasional aberrations, but that is what it is.

Once an agency goes rogue, it is very tough to deal with it. CPD is supposed to have 13,500 officers according to budgets, and public statements of Chicago officials. By some accounts posted on SecondCityCop, the real number is well under 10,000, and may be under 9,000.

Say there are 10,000 cops. And you have to get rid of 2000 of them. Where do you get 2000 cops to replace them? Even if it were as few as 500 that needed replacement it would put a huge dent in the CPD's manpower.

And with civil service and unions being they way they are, chances are you won't be able to get rid of most of the ones that need it anyway.

And you can bet that a large number of those that would need to go would be supervisors and manager types. You aren't going to find those guys at the local temp agency either.

ilbob
October 15, 2007, 01:19 PM
By FOID do you mean Freedom of Information Act or firearms owner ID? 2 very differnet things. I'm just confused because there is not D in FOIA
You are quick on the post. I realized after I posted it that I had a typo and went back to fix it, but, alas, you were too fast for me. I think maybe it was a spell check thing. FOID is in my spell checker, FOIA is not.

:)

Deanimator
October 15, 2007, 02:30 PM
Even if it were as few as 500 that needed replacement it would put a huge dent in the CPD's manpower.
On the other hand, what GOOD are those 500 doing? Their most significant "contribution" seems to be costing the city millions of $s in out of court settlements and judgements. Take Alvin Weems for example. I predict that when it's all said and done, he'll cost the city upwards of $20,000,000. It's hard for me to envision him providing $20,000,000 of value to the City of Chicago. Robocop he isn't. Even worse, look at Finnegan and the rest of the SOS types. Not only are they going to cost the city millions in legal fees and damages, they're going to nullify easily dozens of prosecutions. If I were a criminal defense attorney, I'd be checking the background of EVERY cop who testifies against one of my clients. I'll be impeaching EVERY one who even came NEAR SOS. Then you get to Burge and his boys. Not only are he and the City going down the tubes legally, the City is paying MILLIONS of dollars in his legal fees.

The bottom line is that you'll never convince me that the absence of John Abbate and his ilk is a net minus for the department. What's worse, an unfilled slot, or a slot filled by somebody who costs the City millions AND makes the rest of the force pariahs around the world?

Yeah, a political change is required... but you'd get that by default if we saw Dick Daley in an orange jumpsuit...

NWISkunk
October 15, 2007, 04:51 PM
The way the investigation in WI is going, it will be hard for the community to ever trust LE there again.

It's a decent point but far from the truth. Most folks in Crandon know that neither of the Police Departments (City and County) had anything to do with the shootings, thus, very few if any folks are holding them responsible.

It's hard to put into words, but I would wager that most of the shock and concern to the community is based around the concept that a good hometown kid suddenly went bad rather than that he was a police officer who went bad. To a lot of us Crandon folks it wouldn't have mattered if he had worked at the local gas station rather than the police department - the shock of having this happen in our small community (1961 people) would still have been the same.

No psychological evaluation, no mental tests, nothing, could have predicted this would have happened - that's why neither of the Police Departments are to blame. Up until Peterson pulled the trigger, he was a premier citizen and an excellent role model. He had been an "A" student at Crandon High School and he came from a very good family that has owned and operated various businesses throughout the community for as long as I can remember. Any qualified young man or woman in Crandon is encouraged to become a police officer in Crandon if they express an interest. Peterson, with his excellent background was a natural to serve our community. It's a shame it all ended this way, especially for the victims.

Someone pinned a banner on the population sign just as you enter the City of Crandon on highway 8 from the West. The sign reads: "God Bless Crandon."

That's what I say: "God Bless Crandon"

Skunk

another okie
October 15, 2007, 08:16 PM
The thread title "gag order" is inappropriate. A gag order is a court order signed by a judge ordering participants in a law suit or court case not to talk about this. This case involves a suggestion that talking to the press will not be helpful to anyone, which is probably true. Sometimes people need to reminded they are not required to talk to the press.

another okie
October 15, 2007, 08:19 PM
The thread title is not appropriate.
A gag order is issued by a judge to the parties in a pending case.
This is just a suggestion that talking to the press will probably not help anyone, which is probably true in this case.

Sometimes people need a reminder that they do not have to talk to the press just because a camera is stuck in their face.

TexasRifleman
October 15, 2007, 08:20 PM
The thread title "gag order" is inappropriate. A gag order is a court order signed by a judge ordering participants in a law suit or court case not to talk about this.

The thread title is not inappropriate. That term is what the mayor of the town used last week, which is why I have it in " ".

In the midst of the shooting the mayor said "the town is under a gag order, no one can leave where they are right now"

Hypnogator
October 15, 2007, 09:39 PM
"then shoots himself 3 or 4 times in the head"

Yup! Most thorough case of suicide we ever investigated! :rolleyes:

NukemJim
October 15, 2007, 11:33 PM
No psychological evaluation, no mental tests, nothing, could have predicted this would have happened

Uhmm... Ehrrr..... Could you please show us the documentation on the above statement? Sorry I am not trying to be offensive but I do wonder where that came from.

NukemJim

Officers'Wife
October 15, 2007, 11:40 PM
Hi Rifleman,

What scares me is that this is the kind of incident the Founders wanted a free press for. When LEO's complain they aren't getting a fair shake or public trust... This is the sort of thing is the reason why. Who will guard us from our guardians?

Selena

Deanimator
October 16, 2007, 08:44 AM
Yup! Most thorough case of suicide we ever investigated!
Wasn't it Stalin who said, "Any fool can commit a murder. It takes an artist to commit a suicide."

ilbob
December 10, 2007, 08:53 AM
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=694681

siglite
December 10, 2007, 08:58 AM
The gag order doesn't surprise me at all. We had a questionable shoot go down a few years ago. A senior LEO working with a UC was caught in a firefight WITH NO WEAPON ON HIS PERSON.

It stunk to high heaven. The whole situation.

Gag order.

No one's talked about it since.

ilbob
December 10, 2007, 09:40 AM
The gag order doesn't surprise me at all. We had a questionable shoot go down a few years ago. A senior LEO working with a UC was caught in a firefight WITH NO WEAPON ON HIS PERSON.

It stunk to high heaven. The whole situation.

Gag order.

No one's talked about it since.

an almost universal approach government takes when it screws up. nothing really new.

most of the time when they clam up it is to avoid the embarrassment. but once in a while there is actually a good reason for it.

TexasRifleman
December 10, 2007, 09:42 AM
From the article....

The Journal Sentinel was told that reports and investigative materials related to the case were mailed last week, but so far nothing has arrived.

Wow. "It's in the mail"....

ilbob
December 10, 2007, 10:07 AM
It's in the mail
Nothing like blaming it on another government agency. :)

Wes Janson
December 10, 2007, 01:01 PM
So it's probably reasonable to assume that he committed the crime with a department-issued (or at the very least, approved) rifle. And when he tried to run for it, they opened fire.

Gotta wonder what the whole story really is.
"The Kegleys hindered the operation more than they helped," Van Cleve said. "They made themselves hostages. I think they thought they were being goody two-shoes and were going to talk the guy out. They should have gotten the hell out of there and let us do our job, and it would have gone much smoother."

Just the paranoid in me..but I have to say that statement certainly can be read more than one way...

If you enjoyed reading about "WI Shooting Followup - Still in "Gag Order" mode" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!