Tuesday, October 4, 2011

What does it cost to fight Seipler?

Yesterday a reader asked me what I thought it has cost the taxpayers of McHenry County for Sheriff Keith Nygren to fight Deputy Zane Seipler.

Which reminds me of the Sheriff's fight with Deputy Bob Schlenkert. And the fight that will surely arise regarding the firing of Deputy Scott Milliman.

It costs the taxpayers because Nygren is devoting huge chunks of his Department money by using outside legal counsel. He has, of course, his "own" statutory attorney. That would be McHenry County State's Attorney Lou Bianchi and staff. I wonder if they are giving advice him that he doesn't like - like, "You really don't have a case, you know?"

Is anyone interested in how much the sheriff has spent on the three legal actions involving Seipler?
1. A firing, when the appropriate discipline should have been three days off. How many years of back pay will Zane Seipler collect?
2. A wrongful termination civil suit in Federal District Court, in which one of the sheriff's attorney has already told the judge that the reason Zane was fired was because he had complained about racial profiling. (Nygren says that's not the reason. But his attorney said it was!!!)
3. Improper use of County money to plaster his "special" 7-point star all over County vehicles, property and stationery.

Where is the investigation into waste by the Northwest Herald, one of our county's main newspapers? Why don't they file a FOIA request for the legal bills and report fully and fairly what they learn?


Tyler said...

Is there any miscondcut that rises to YOUR expectation to be fired?

If these same actions were carried out on any other agency they would be toast.

You just don't want NYgren to win at anything, even discharge of a bad employee.

Gus said...

Certainly, there is misconduct that justifies discharge.

You have to look at Nygren's pattern, though. When he doesn't fire an employee in one instance but does in another, similar instance (because the second employee is complaining about something illegal occurring within the department), then Nygren deserves to lose.

Nygren discharged a whistleblower, and the arbitrator, circuit court judge and appellate court all ruled against Nygren.

Tyler said...

He fired an employee that committed an illegal act. Writing a ticket to a person that DID NOT DRIVE. (Offical Misconduct)

The other deputy gave the person that WAS DRIVING a choice of which ticket to recieve. Stupid but not illegal.

Zane only became a whistle blower AFTER the fact.

You are just biased against the McHenry CO Sheriff Dept.

Gus said...

"Tyler", you are a good Nygrenite. I'm sure Keith is proud of you.

Someone told me once not to tell a person he was wrong. He said it was more polite to say that you wished he was right.

So, I wish you were right.

Nygren's attorney told Federal District Court Judge Mahoney that the reason Seipler was fired was because he complained about racial profiling.

Why don't you call her and tell her she lied to the judge? And you might also tell Judge Mahoney that an officer of the court lied to him.

Only she didn't lie. She told the truth.

Zane's records of wrongdoing at MCSD pre-date his termination.

No, I'm not biased against the McHenry County Sheriff's DEPT. I'm biased against Sheriff Nygren.

Mike said...

I must side with Tyler on this one. Seems that this particular deputy should not be wearing a badge and regardless if it were here Chicago or Podunk IA, that type of misdeed should end his police career.

I read the transcript of the court hearing either here or on another blog and strongly believe the statement made by that attorney was simply her getting her words tangled while trying to answer questions. Obama said 'my Muslim faith' in an interview and everyone chalked it of as a misstatement.

I think in your quest to vilify Nygren, you reach too far.

Gus said...

Radar, thanks for your comment.

I was standing right next to Ms. Barton when she spoke to Judge Mahoney. She was speaking clearly, directly, without hesitation. There was no confusion in her thinking process or speech.

It's not I who agrees or disagrees with the discipline to be meted out for Zane's mistake. Nygren set a precedent for letting infractions slide, and that probably helped the arbitrator decide that three days off was adequate discipline. The rest of the court actions are not about the discipline, but whether the arbitrator made a proper decision. Two courts say he did.

Nygren needs to suck it up and accept it, and not waste more taxpayer money avoiding the inevitable.

Dave Labuz said...

Lay it out for us, Gus.

Currently, how many adjudicative bodies' decisions thus far weigh against Nygren's continued idiotic resistance to reality in this particular case?