Friday, August 12, 2011

Next round in Nygren v. Seipler

You must read the newest article on Keith Nygren claims that Zane Seipler committed perjury!

First, let me say (trust me; I am not a crook) that I have not talked to Zane Seipler about this.

McHenry County Sheriff Keith Nygren claims that soon-to-be-reinstated Deputy Zane Seipler committed perjury. Read the article. I don't need to re-hash it here. You'll find it here: No doubt it will be on Page 1 of Saturday's Northwest Herald. Save it. Or bookmark this online article. And when the Northwest Herald archives it and wants $2.95 for it a week from now, just use your Woodstock library card to read it, free, at any time.

Attorney Jim Sotos' law firm colleague, Elizabeth K. Barton, got quoted before Sotos in the article. She said, "The documents were highly confidential and contained personal information about third-party officers, causing them embarrassment and damage to their reputations."

Funny how she didn't mention the confidential deposition of Scott Milliman that Sheriff Nygren told Undersheriff Zinke to give to Crystal Lake businessman Jose Rivera. Somehow that deposition got leaked to the Northwest Herald. And, somehow, the Northwest Herald story failed to mention that "indiscretion".

I have no idea who wrote "The Real MCSD Exposed" blog on But what I do know is that anyone can use anyone's email address for a secondary email, or even a primary one. I could set up a blog and put the sheriff's email address down for a secondary address. There are no checks when setting up a free blog. Personally, I do not believe that Zane had anything to do with it, and I think Nygren has crawled way out on the wrong limb of a very fragile tree in making such a charge against Zane.

Heck, I occasionally read, so my computer's IP address will show up there, too. And, for sure, I did not write it.

The article goes on to say, "Attorneys for the sheriff said Seipler 'willfully lied' to the court and that it was a 'stunning display of brazen misconduct.'" Do you think both Sotos and Barton said that? I doubt it. Sounds like Sotos' words to me. Miss Barton is too professional to say that.

I'd like to remind readers of a "stunning display of honesty" by Miss Barton in Judge Mahoney's court a couple of months ago, when she made an honest statement (aren't all attorneys' statements in court honest?) about the reason that Zane was fired. She said he was fired for complaining about racial profiling. That's exactly what she said. I was standing right next to her, and the transcription reports her exact words.

Doesn't Nygren say Zane was not fired for that reason? My money is on Miss Barton for telling the truth in court. Should Nygren be charged with perjury?


Curious1 said...

It won't be rocket science, Google can easily tell the IP address of whomever uploaded the documents in question. IF it is Seipler's IP address that uploaded those documents and IF he signed a document directly to a federal judge swearing it wasn't him then things are not likely to go well for him. Neither Google or the Judge have a dog in this fight so in this case the facts are simply going to end up speaking for themselves.

Midnight Rider Review said...

Okay, because none of us know for sure what the entire truth is, but for the sake of debate, let's assume that what was written in the Herald is correct.

So, based on this, Let's assume Zane did what they said he did.

Now then, what do we make of the fact that a court ordered 'sealed' deposition from Deputy Milliman found its way out onto the streets and into the hands of NW Herald reporter and chronic law breaker, Kevin Lyons.

Then, Lyons writes a slanderous article publishing names of persons who are not involved in any litigation against the Sheriff based on eliments allegedly taken from an "Active Duty" Deputy Sheriff, Scott Milliman.

Deputy Milliman's brother, was murdered shortly thereafter in McHenry County.

What about alleged court ordered sealed documents about Zane Seiplers personal life that allegedly had been passed out in the squad room of the Sheriffs Department?

It all appears to be, if we are to believe all this, that both parties may have acted improperly.

Point is, none of these issues have anything to do with alleged racial profiling issues that are at the heart of the Federal Case.

Nothing seemingly happened to the Sheriff and or his underlings for letting sensitive, sealed documents out of his and or his attorney's trust.

So, I doubt anything will come of this alleged leaking of documents that show very poor behavior by our county police force.

I would imagine the individuals whose names appear on the documetns in question, are indeed embarassed and feel like fools.

Sad truth is, those named did what they did, and they cannot escape this fact.

I think it is shameful that the court would not allow the public to know about those who conducted themselves in such a fashion and yet, are still employed to act as our trusted civil servants.

That my friends, is where the real crime lies. The truth is what it is and it's not pretty.

Then again, it was years ago, and I believe everybody is entitled to second chances and youthful acts of idiodicy can be forgiven.

In this light, it's really to bad that Sheriff Nygren and Zane Seipler can't sit down man to man, and to what is best for each other, their families and for the tax payers of McHenry County.

Cut some checks and move on, or, make a mends and let's move forward and get back to work.

There appears to be enough blame to go around.

Curious1 said...

I don't think the leaking of the document will be the big issue with the judge. I expect the signing a document and swearing to the judge that it wasn't him will be want the judge has an issue with.

Gus said...

If I recall correctly, one of the disciplinary reports was about a drinking party at the Red Mill Inn (under its former ownership), drunken driving and battery on a fellow deputy. No wonder those named are embarrassed. Of course, they should have been arrested, but they weren't.

I provided information to the Woodstock Police Chief. He sent an investigator to MCSD. The detective came back empty-handed.

Command people at MCSD (how far up the ladder?) just swept it under the table and kept it out of public view (for a while, anyway).

Did the detective just happen to ask one of those supervisors who had been involved? Who at MCSD lied to him and told him nothing had happened? He knows, and Chief Lowen must know.

Karen30036 said...

Correct me if I'm wrong here, The REAL MCSD started up AFTER Seipler's blog MCSD Exposed, and was very pro Nygren. Most of the postings were attacking Mr. Seipler. Very strange Mr. Seipler's e-mail would be associated with that particular blog.

Gus said...

Exactly, Karen, and a fact that seems to be lost on Nygren and his lawyers.

Maybe what they ought to be investigating is which Nygrenite started that blog and who attempted to discredit Zane by placing his email address there.

Will the miscreant be someone in the "in-crowd" at MCSD?

Curious1 said...

Two sites are getting mixed up in this I believe. One had MCSD in it's name and one had MCSO in its name. The rest of the name was very similar. One was anti-Zane and was around for a while, where I believe the other is the one in question. As I remember it the site in question was only up for a short time, was pro-Zane, and had the documents in question up.

Gus said...

It seems to me that the newspaper article with the comments from Attorneys James Sotos and Elizabeth Barton was quite vague about just where Zane's computer I.P. Address was found or how it was used, if at all.

The assumption in reader comments seems to accuse Zane of uploading privileged documents. I'll be in Rockford this week and guess I'll have to go by the Federal courthouse to read the new lawsuit.

I wonder why Sotos doesn't just put it on his website.

Gus said...

Be sure to read the comment to the first NWH article (on 8/12/11) by "keith l., woodstock, il (walrus)". Search for "Seipler" to find the article.

He asked, " does showing real documents of real actions committed by county supervisors hurt their reputation. Was it the actions that hurt their reputation or the posting of them. It's terrible when the truth gets out to the public."

The McHenry County Sheriff's Department does not want the public to know that it handles traffic charges (DUI) and criminal charges (battery on a deputy) as administrative actions, not as crimes.