Eric Woods - a "victim"

Jill Duchnowski's article titled "Candidates criticize incident" was published on March 26, 2010, in the online edition of the Northwest Herald. That article was about criticism of the so-called investigation of the injury suffered by Deputy Eric Woods at the McHenry County Sheriff's Department shooting range on March 15.

"Murphy" got the last word on Thursday night at 10:30PM, clearing up whether Eric Woods was a "victim" by writing, "This incident was investigated properly and thouroughly (sic). The reason no one from within is criticizing is easy to explain. There is no cover up. There is nothing to hide. Accident happened. Emergency plan implemented. Victim treated AND released. Reports written. Interviews completed. Lesson learned. Victim isn't complaining. Your obviously just grasping at straws..."

"Murphy" and I have vastly different standards for "investigated properly and thouroughly (sic)".

If you believed what he wrote, you'd say it was over. It's not. Just today I did finally reach an official at the Attorney General's office and the next step has been taken.

Most of my reasons for believing that the incident was not investigated properly and thoroughly have been hashed and re-hashed in other recent articles on this blog.

There's no cover up? OK, if not, where are the reports that should have been written by the Sheriff's "leaders" after they reviewed the injury incident (if they did)? Don't they consider Woods' injury (two months on the injury list) important enough to document? Or are they unwilling to document it?

Why is no one inside criticizing it? Why doesn't a chicken stick its neck out? Because he'll get his head chopped off! Remember the commandment, "Thou shalt not criticize anything at the sheriff's department."

"Victim treated and released." Yep, and back for more treatment and two months off work. Gee, "Murphy", did you overlook that?

"Reports written." No, "Murphy"; no "reports." "Departmental Correspondence" was written. And cookie-cutter, at that. Tell me, please - How could two corrections officers write 71 consecutive words in exact, identical order?

"Interviews completed." What interviews? There weren't any "interviews." If there had been, there would have been reports written by the deputy(ies) conducting them.

Why didn't Deputy Woods or Sgt. Embry or Lt. Miller write reports? Huh? Tell me that. Did the sheriff or one of his supervisors just tell Woods, "Oh, that's okay, Eric. We know your leg hurts, so you don't have to write a report."

"Lesson learned." How does the public know that? In fact, how do any of the deputies know that?

"Victim isn't complaining." Aha! Gotcha! Thanks for using the word "victim," "Murphy". The truth finally came out. I knew it would.

Why would Woods' "complain"? He knows what happens to complainers? I hope he is talking to his attorney about compensation for his injury.

Did he file a worker's compensation claim? Did they ask enough questions to figure out what really caused his injury (and I don't mean "just" a ricochet)?

Once again, thanks, "Murphy". You cleared it up for everyone.