Saturday, July 29, 2006

Escalation of claims NOT normal procedure

Joan et. al.

Joan may remember the extreme vandalism committed against a vehicle I owned in the spring of 2005. I communicated with Joan at that time about this incident. The level of violence and destruction against said vehicle makes Wilson’s “harassment” look like a playful punch in the shoulder from a buddy compared to a having someone drop kick your face into the pavement losing your front teeth in a bloody fractured enameled mess.

My car windows were smashed out, doors frames bent, it looked like from being impacted by a cinder block, tires flattened. . . The car had been pushed or towed into the road from the parking area by the vandals, blocking traffic. Consider this was on a rural gravel road, the crime was committed in the early morning hours on a Saturday, and my car was parked a distance away from the residence.

When Latah Sheriff deputies showed up, having been notified by someone driving that the road was blocked, they had my vandalized car towed, sticking me with the 100 dollar tow bill. I was sound asleep the whole time.

After my car was towed away, the two Latah Sheriff deputies pounded on my door, waking me up. They informed me what had happened, and told me the identity of the tow truck business where my car was being held.

And the main relevance of this story to the naming of “suspects” by Wilson regarding the alleged “harassment?”

During my brief discussion of the vandalizing of my car with the Latah Sheriff deputies, one of them asked if I had any enemies, or could give them names of suspects. I offered none. Sure, I could have reeled off a list of people who might or do have something against me for one reason or another. But I felt I had nothing solid to go on to name anybody.

I am not as naive as some on this list who seem to think that offering the police names of individuals who might be suspects in a crime, when you have no solid evidence to implicate them, is a trifling issue. I think it is highly ethically questionable to implicate others in crimes without solid grounds.

I could expand in great detail on this theme regarding the negative consequences of my name being unfairly given to law enforcement to implicate me in a crime, based on flimsy, unfounded ”evidence.” This can damage reputation, limit employment options, subject someone to embarrassing police scrutiny, if not harassment, etc.

We see cases in the media where just naming someone as a suspect in a crime does tremendous damage to the person named, even when later they are totally exonerated. And police reports are public documents, are they not?

It would appear so, given that the police reports in question are now on Tom Hansen’s web site. I don’t think law enforcement would release them to the public if they were meant to be kept “secret,” unless forced legally by some means

Hansen, Metzler, et. al. are all justified in being very concerned about this issue, in my opinion.