More on Gorski BOFPC Hearing

In yesterday's BOFPC hearing, the Board continued its hearing to dates mentioned in yesterday's article on this website. The Amended Complaint would have been filed with the BOFPC, where it ought to be a confidential document.

This morning's Northwest Herald states, "City attorney David McArdle has asked to have the complaint against Gorski amended to better reflect the evidence that already had been presented."

First of all, why is McArdle saying anything about this Amended Complaint?

Secondly, the Board probably could have made a decision yesterday in about five seconds. No. As in, NO. Better yet, NO!!!

You don't get to hear the evidence that is presented and then get to amend your complaint, unless you are going to reduce the charges (or drop them). Is that what is going to happen?

The Board has already decided that the case presented by the police chief and his witnesses got a failing grade. The charges didn't stick. Why should there be any different decision?

As I have written before, the 3-man Board heard all the testimony - in person. When you hear testimony in person, you not only hear the words - you get to judge the manner in which the testimony is presented. Often, non-verbal expression is equally or more important than verbal expression.

Were the months of testimony videotaped? I don't think so.