Isn't life interesting? Just when the heat is on the sheriff to run a professional department (CALEA accreditation pending, don't you know?), something like this happens.
I'm still gathering details, but I've learned that an intoxicated off-duty deputy of the McHenry County Sheriff's Department rolled a pick-up truck on Sunday, October 31, about 3:30AM near Maguire Road and Alden Road. He was apparently on the way home from a party, and he had been encouraged not to drive and had been offered a ride home.
Supposedly, the McHenry County Sheriff's Department and Woodstock Fire Rescue District responded. The intoxicated driver was still belted in the upside-down vehicle on arrival.
Now here is the kicker. Apparently, he was given a ride home without citations!
He was expected to work on Sunday morning. Is there any rule at MCSD as to the number of hours immediately before a work shift during which alcohol is not to be consumed? In the airlines business, it's called "from-bottle-to-throttle"; is there a similar rule for deputies? If not, there ought to be. Do we want an intoxicated or impaired deputy driving a patrol car, wearing a uniform and carrying a gun?
If this is true, then there are a road deputy and at least one supervisor in need of heavy discipline. And any supervisor on up the food chain who had knowledge of the crash and allowed the driver to be taken home, instead of to the hospital for a BAC test and examination.
Was the Illinois State Police called to investigate, as would be advisable when a deputy, on- or off-duty is involved in a crash that involved alcohol? They are called to eliminate (well, at least "reduce") the favoritism that might be shown when a supervisor investigates a crash involving a subordinate or fellow employee.
Think about what would happen to you, if you wrecked your vehicle after a night of drinking. Police report, blood-alcohol test, arrest, bond, information to the press. See anything in the Northwest Herald yesterday or today?
Maybe it's not true. Maybe it's just a tip that was passed along to me, trying to sandbag me on Election Day. Somehow, I don't think so; but, if it was, I'll be sure to apologize without delay.
Trespassing in Woodstock
3 hours ago
16 comments:
Additional information is coming in. Was the driver a Corrections Officer at the jail?
Anybody got a name? Starts with ...? I have the name; just need confirmation.
But the bigger issue is HOW the crash investigation was handled!
CALEA! Where are you, when you are needed?
Will the MCSD CALEA standards read, "If an intoxicated driver works for the sheriff's department, give him a ride home. Do not ticket him. Do not arrest."
Is this how a department earns and retains its accreditation? By following its rules (even if the rules are wrong)?
If a Corrections Officer were arrested for DUI and locked up in his own jail, how effective would he be, when he later returned to work?
Supposedly....Apparently....Is there any rule at MCSD.... Do we want an intoxicated or impaired deputy driving a patrol car.... If this is true...
Geese Gus could you find anymore weasel words to avoid facing facts that it is UNTRUE but you love to cast unfounded aspersions and you are truly the king of hyperbole. Crafted just vague enough to avoid libel…..
You're a sad case Gus!
Notawannabee, you may want to find your napkin and get ready to wipe the egg off your face. When I confirm the name of the driver AND the names of the deputies and supervisors involved, I wonder if you'll be singing a different tune. Probably not, but at least all will know you are off-key.
Again you post far too much hyperbole. Before you know any facts you post supposition and wild eyed speculation.
The MCSO has a proven track record of NOT ignoring the DUI laws during the investigation of officers involved crashes. Two deputies were fired, one of which was actually originally investigated by another agency and only at the insistence of the MCSP Sgt was a BAC (Blood Alcohol Test) performed.
You seem to think ONLY another agency can properly investigate. Please show me any statute requiring that. You always take the word of anyone OTRHER THAN to deputy.
Contrary to what you’d like people to believe, the MCSO has high ethical standards
Well, you were right about the Crystal Lake cop in a similar situation, so I have reason to think you might be on to something in this case too.
Guess I should read them before I hit publish...
Should be "You always take the word of anyone OTHER THAN the deputy".
Whitmore, if you go back and review, I think you'll find that you're talking about the sheriff's deputy who crashed a squad car after leaving a party. For whatever reason, the CLPD officer was not going to test him. A county sgt arrived on the scene and had the test performed. The deputy - clearly in the wrong - was charged appropriately and FIRED. If you wish, like Gus, to criticize that department for every goofy thing that one of their members may do, feel free. Don't however, condemn the sheriff or the majority of the department because they DO the right thing.
Darth, now help us understand why the Sheriff (wait; don't blame him - he was probably in Florida) or the Undersheriff didn't promptly release information to the media. That deputy's crash happened early on a Sunday morning; the Northwest Herald didn't publish it until Friday. It should have been in Monday morning's paper!
Darth, no, I'm talking about a separate incident that was similar, only it happened to a CLPD officer. And Gus had blogged his suspicions about that incident (the one to which I referring) quite some time ago. Gus was right then, in spite of nay sayers. I'm thinking he's probably right about this one too.
Apples & oranges... Perhaps the NWH had the information (from whatever sources) and were trying to verify it rather than just publishing rumors. New concept to you? Maybe the sheriff's dept was completing the investigation before releasing all the details. What's the problem? That they took care of business without telling you and the NWH first? Or that they didn't do it quick enough to suit you? When are we to learn what's going on with the bounty you've been talking about?
Can't help you on that one then, Whitmore. I'm drawing a blank. The only one I recall was the MCSO officer who crashed his car down in the Coventry area. Perhaps Gus can recall the one you're thinking of but he's only responding about the one I've mentioned.
Good try, Darth. No, the NWH didn't know about it until I tipped them.
The Bounty? Guess you'll have to wait for it to be officially announced about Jan. 1.
If you tipped them, then perhaps that explains why it took them awhile to publish it. They at least attempt to check facts before publishing. They are bad, but not so bad they would immediately halt the presses to publish something that you (or I, for that matter) told them.
As for the "good try" there you go with your insinuations again. I wasn't "trying" anything. Instead of being cute, why don't you answer the question? "Was there another DUI crash that involved a CLPD officer that Whitmore is referencing or was it the county mountie who got caught and fired?"
I won't hold my breath waiting for the official announcement about the bounty. If there was anything to it, you would have spread it around as fact rather than rumor, right?
Gus said "any supervisor on up the food chain who had knowledge of the crash and allowed the driver to be taken home, instead of to the hospital for a BAC test and examination." ……"Now here is the kicker. Apparently, he was given a ride home without citations!"
Gus, what about a small issue called LAW & PROCEDURE? Maybe the hayseed PD you volunteered for didn't see the need for it, but there must be probable cause. Neither you nor I know the cause of this crash or as you call them accident. Animal, other vehicle, mechanical; there are many reasons other than drunk.
Not all traffic crashes result in a citation. It is UNLAWFUL to just drag a driver to the hospital and tap a vein unless there is a violation and you have evidence of being impaired. Once again you jump to conclusions and play Judge, Jury and if you could carry a gun, executioner.
Going back over you blog, what's your record. Have you ever been right or is this another case of throw it against the wall and see what sticks.
Darth was correct, you are just publishing rumors.
If you wanted to be journalistically correct, you'd find facts, investigate, and then report.
Oh No, not the Woodstock Advocate. The motto there is “Hear rumor, make up a story to fit, publish it and hope someone agrees.”
Just like the other rumors you start this was not based upon known facts but rather based upon rumors. In your quest to get your smears out there, you publish unsubstantiated gossip first and then maybe if questioned, check for facts.
You’re right up there with the famous headline of “Earth at War With Aliens“ WHAT? Damn that Orson Welles, hold the press it’s a unannounced radio show.
“Dewey Defeats Truman" Chicago Tribune Nov 3 1948 , WHAT? …WHO won?
The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated, (Mark Twain, after his death was published)
Also from our friend Mark Twain was his quote “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as you please.” This must be Gus's favorite.
Lastly here is one Gus really needs to think about. It’s about TRUTH.
“The truth is more important than the facts.” Frank Lloyd Wright (1869 - 1959)
Post a Comment