Saturday, July 29, 2006

Ted’s car (was: Escalation of claims)

Joan et. al.

Thanks for your reply.

I warmly recall your concern and offer of “The Beast” (isn’t that what you called it?) as a temporary replacement vehicle, at the time my car was vandalized.

I’d rather not be too critical against the Latah Sheriff Dept.’s conduct in the case of my vandalized car, for a number of reasons. They had answers regarding how they conducted themselves in this case. But I agree you raise valid questions regarding their conduct in this incident.

The tow fee is one of those cases where the victim of a crime gets victimized again due to how the system works. When property someone owns presents a hazard to public safety, like having a car left in the middle of the road, even though the fact of the car being in the road occurred because of the commission of a crime, not by my doing, the owner still can get stuck with a tow bill. And the tires were all flat, so the car had to be dragged or towed off the road, not just pushed. Law enforcement felt public safety dictated getting the car off the road as quickly as possible via a tow truck. Law enforcement apparently does not feel compelled to pay the bill in these cases. That lovely expense falls on the owner of the vehicle.

Anyway, I did not check into the details of the law in regards to the tow fee I was expected to pay, so I really do not know all the legal issues involved. The whole incident was so upsetting I just wanted it to go away. . .

My main point was, the level of vandalism I experienced makes a mailbox condom, a few flat tires, and a window mess, seem rather tame by comparison. Yet I felt, knowing the seriousness of implicating someone as a suspect, and the lack of evidence I had regarding who committed the crime, that I could be sending law enforcement on fishing expeditions, possibly causing harm to totally innocent people, to name anyone, though there were certain individuals I suspected and still suspect. It’s entirely possible total strangers vandalized my car.

I think it natural of Wilson to be concerned that these incidents of “vandalism” might be indicative of a pattern that could involve much more serious actions in the future, or continuing actions of the same nature, thus the need to call law enforcement to report the incidents, or to expect more monitoring of his residence.

As has been made clear, it is the naming of individuals as suspects with no good evidence they were involved that is questionable, individuals some of whom I highly doubt would commit such juvenile prankish vandalism, at least now that they are mature adults, though I know nothing about several of the individuals named in Wilson’s statement.