I thought I might read some well-wishes to Deputy Eric Woods in the March/April issue of the McHenry County Sheriff's Department Newsletter but, alas, no mention of his injury or recuperation. Or, if it's there, I missed it (but I don't think so).
Woods is mentioned only on Page 7, along with other deputies who responded to a crash on February 7.
There were several places where Woods might have been mentioned; the Training Division report by Sgt. Jim Wagner could have mentioned it. A local paper, I believe, mentioned that Wagner was to head up the investigation of the range accident.
It could have been mentioned in Lt. Cedergren's report under Home on the Range. The range program includes multiple targets, moving targets, knock down targets, shoot/don't shoot targets, malfunction drills, movement drills, cover drills, and "combat courses that test your ability to apply the fundamentals of marksmanship to fluid situations." I guess one of the "don't shoot" situations is not a prohibition of shooting on a steel target that is only two feet in front of you and two feet from a fellow deputy.
By "fluid situation" Lt. Cedergren probably didn't mean blood gushing out of a leg wound, which Deputy Woods experienced when he was shot by a ricochet or splatter on March 15, supposedly with the "lead free frangible ammo." And he didn't mention the real-life, first-aid response to an injured deputy.
Does range firing include realistic practice (other than Woods' experience), should a SWAT team member or other deputy be shot during an actual domestic call or SWAT response? Woods' injury is a reminder to every deputy to pay attention during first-aid training. They do get first-aid training, don't they?
By now, the investigation of the range injury should have been completed. Hopefully, Sgt. Wagner has gotten some re-written reports that will actually inform him what really happened that day. Did he kick back the two reports that had identical passages of 71 consecutive words from two range observers from Corrections?
I'm still shaking my head over those two reports. Somebody's head ought to roll over that one, and it shouldn't be the two Corrections Officers who wrote down what they were told to write down!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Obviously someone FED you the Sheriff's Newsletter. You see fit to disparage the fine work of the Newsletter editor and the MCSO by trying to ridicule perceived lack of what YOU see as important.
Earlier when I commented "knowing that everything written by Gus seems to be an attack aimed towards anything the MCSO does. Please Gus, if the MCSO does something GOOD, in your opinion, please write about it.
You posted from your blog on
May 11, 2010 4:22 PM
[Quote]
I would welcome the opportunity to write complimentary articles about MCSD deputies, corrections officers, employees, etc. and those in any agencies I know of.
Maybe somebody could pass along the good deeds. I used to stop and assist motorists with flat tires, out-of-gas, etc. These days deputies and cops drive right without stopping to help or inquire if help is needed.
In fact, if I can get myself elected Sheriff, I intend to know about the good things that deputies do and to sure that they are publicized.
And the deputies, the front line, will be in the spotlight. [End quote]
Well Gus if you read the Sheriff's Newsletter there are several pages assigned to letters of citizen appreciation letters and commendations for deputies that did just as you said.
Did you ignore this because it does not fit your agenda of slamming the MCSO??....WELL?
Why shouldn't I see a copy of the newsletter?
Anybody, a-n-y-b-o-d-y, can request a copy of it, although it might take a FOIA Request to get it, which it shouldn't.
You still didn't answer my question. Since you have read it, and there are many complimentary letters about MCSO employees, why do you only condemn, not credit?
You cast a blind eye to the good issues and seek out the only what you can twist into some critical sarcasm.
Employees in any business or government agency are paid to do a good job.
Maybe some citizen will call me up and tell me about exemplary service received from MCSD.
I'll be sure to mention it, if it happens.
It is obvious to anyone reading your blog that based upon that previous comment, you will continue to ignore anything positive and only dwell on finding anything you can twist into a negative story. Is your favorite character OSCAR the GROUCH?
You ignored when the Newsletter published many letters of commendation for MCSO employees.
Looking at my most recent newsletter I see several letters thanking the K-9 Unit for their assistance or demo's around the county.
One was commending a deputy for his diligence for catching and arresting a man that was trespassing on his ex-girlfriends property. (Unknown to her) This was discovered only because he checked a plate on an empty car that was not from the area discovering the owner has an expired Order of Protection. He checked the area and found that a crime was in progress. (Just good police work)
How about the letter from a family thanking the five MCSO deputies for their quick actions thereby saving their loved ones life?
How about the one thanking the MCSO for assistance during a grieving period and funeral?
Nope, I guess there isn't anything GOOD to be seen, just what you find allegedly absent.
Nota, you forgot to mention clearly that the commendation was written by Sheriff Nygren and not by a citizen. Yes, the deputy did a good job of being suspicious.
What is an "expired" Order of Protection? It's nothing - legally. And the license plate was listed to that address, as the sheriff mentioned. No probable cause there. And the sheriff also wrote, "Although it was never discovered why the offender was at the residence..."; why not? That ought to have been part of the investigation.
Was the guy caught in the garage convicted of Criminal Trespass?
And if a citizen compliments an officer or the department for something they have done - letters which I have seen from time to time, what will be your excuse then? "Writer was not verified?" "Writer refused to speak with me (Gus) when contacted" "This doesn't meet MY standard of 'above and beyond'"
I used to have at least some respect for you, Gus. Well, actually I still do. You seem to say really dumb things and then, when somebody point out that the "Emperor has no clothes" and points out just how ignorant your statement was/is, you go ahead a publish it. I'm not sure if that's what you realize you're doing but it is.
No, that expired order of protection had no validity since it was expired. It would seem though, that due to the deputies actions, it should have been renewed. One cannot ever predict with any accuracy how many crimes are prevented by an alert patrol officer but if one uses just a bit of common sense it should be quite obvious that the actions of the deputy in this case were exemplary and commendation by the sheriff, the victim, whomever are justified. Justified, apparently, by anyone by you.
Post a Comment