Chicago Tribune editorializes on MCSD

Look at what Sheriff Nygren's attorney, James Sotos, told the Chicago Tribune: "The sheriff is committed to ensuring that there is no racial profiling at the sheriff's department."

Look at, and understand, the words. Lawyers are good at using a lot of words so that people really don't understand what is being said. Is this a classic example?

He didn't say, "There isn't acial profiling." He didn't say, "There will not be racial profiling." What he said was, "The sheriff is committed to ensuring ..." That's not the same thing. That's a statement that is not measurable and attaches no accountability. How do you measure commitment?

You can read Tuesday's editorial in the Chicago Tribune right here: www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-profiling-20110329,0,5937494.story

The Tribune has this to say about "mislabeling" in the McHenry County Sheriff's Department: "In 2006, 1 in 8 likely Hispanics who were ticketed in McHenry was labeled as white or was not logged. By 2009, the Tribune reported, the error rate had spiked to 1 in 3."

But remember that Sheriff Nygren confidently announced that his (first) investigation revealed no profiling. And so did the second. Only after a smart, out-of-McHenry-County (read, Chicago Loop) attorney got involved did the profiling bubble up to the surface where it counted - in Federal Court.

Why did Zane Seipler go to Chicago for an attorney? Why did Jerome Pavin go to Chicago for an attorney? Why did the Estate of David Maxson go to Chicago for an attorney?

Heck, why did Sheriff Nygren go out of McHenry County for an attorney?

Can't serve warrant on a dead person

On Thursday a warrants sweep was organized by the McHenry County Sheriff's Department Apprehension Unit, and both the Northwest Herald and the Daily Herald reported the roundup, conducted "to address the large number of outstanding arrest warrants", according to the Daily Herald.

What those articles neglected to inform readers of was that one warrant was one for a man who died in September 2006 in a shooting involving the McHenry County Sheriff's Department.

The warrants team included officers and deputies of the Illinois State Police, McHenry County and Lake County Sheriff's Department, U.S. Marshal's Fugitive Task Force, and officers of the police departments of McHenry, Crystal Lake, Cary and Algonquin.

No mention was made of the attempted service to the late David Maxson, who died at age 43 on September 20, 2006. A arrest warrant for DUI was assigned to the combined team, and officers went to a Lake County residence, looking for Maxson.

Maxson had been shot during a MCSD call-for-service that mostly likely should have been handled as a mental-health call on that day in Wonder Lake. That case is well-known within the McHenry County Sheriff's Department and is the subject of one of the lawsuits against the sheriff's department.

Were the warrants confirmed as valid, before the team set out on the sweep? Was there some reason the warrant for Maxson wasn't canceled after he died? Was one of the deputies on the warrants team the supervisor who testified at Coroner's inquest for Maxson? Didn't anyone recognize the name?

According to one source, when the warrants team knocked on the door, a woman answered and told them Maxson was dead. When they asked what happened to him, she may have said something like, "You guys shot him."

No doubt that the officers at the door were embarrassed and apologetic for their error. I wonder how they felt about being sent to that door in the first place.

How far behind is MCSD on warrants service? Remember the case a short time back, where a warrant sweeps team went to Bourbonnais, Ill. to pick up a woman who was wanted on a charge that was 13 years old? As I recall, a judge threw that one out.

Dinner? It couldn't be (could it?)

Does it strike anyone else that maybe there's a little something illegal going on at the McHenry County Sheriff's Department?

In January 2007 I was told of a $100 "bounty" out on me; any deputy who could write me a ticket for anything was going to get $100 cash. And I was told who had offered it. And that's one of the reasons why, when I saw that my headlight was out at 5:40PM on a winter evenng in Wonder Lake, I wrote down the time and the mileage. It happened to be a Woodstock officer who stopped me 20 minutes later right in front of my house, courteously informed of the reason he had stopped me and told me that he would issue a Warning. No problem. Another Woodstock police car (Car 22) showed up (back up or just nosy?); the two officers talked; then the detaining officer returned to my car window and informed me that he was going to issue a ticket, instead.

I was going to fight it, but I rolled over and paid the $75, to avoid the risk of $150 in court costs. I have always wondered just what the second officer said to the officer who stopped me that night.

And then yesterday comes this to me:

"You've been a wanted man for a long time. sgt's have offered dinners for the deputy that gives you a ticket. I'm surprised you haven't been overwhelmed by traffic stops, especially now. They played a tape of you once at roll call when you spoke out at a County board meeting about that guy Seipler shot with the bean bag. I'm surprised Zane reached out to you. It's good though. Things around here are messed up."

The Woodstock officer who stopped me said he had never heard of the bounty offered at the Sheriff's Department, and I believe him.

I have never been critical of the deputy who had to fire the bean bag shotgun; however, I have been critical of the management of that call that resulted in the shooting less than 45 minutes after the deputies responded. It was clearly a mental-health call, fueled by alcohol, and Crisis-Intervention-Trained deputies are supposed to know how to keep such calls from escalating unnecessarily.

It's nice to know that my remarks to the County Board were played at a roll call, and I wonder how many deputies "got" the message and examined their actions at the Maxson residence that day (and their report-writing directions afterwards). Those were the reports I obtained through a FOIA request. I was astounded by the similarity in the reports written by about five different deputies! And I still am.

S.W.A.T. Teams

When a law enforcement agency has extraordinary power available to it, does it tend to use it more often, whether really needed or not, just because it has it and wants to use it?

I was thinking the other day of a stand-off not too long ago in McHenry County on Lamb Road near Charles Road. Anyone remember that one? Deputies surrounded the house for hours and then took a man into custody and hauled him off to the South Street psychiatric facility.

Does anyone remember any criminal charge ever filed against him? Maybe that’s because none ever was.

Then I got to thinking about the sheriff’s department response in the Wonder Lake area to the residence of David Maxson in September 2006. In only 46 minutes the situation escalated to the point where deputies were threatened and Maxson was fatally shot. After reading the police reports and attending the coroner’s inquest, I wondered how different the outcome would have been, if deputies had taken a more reasoned approach and created less confrontation with a person who presented symptoms of mental illness and/or intoxication.

And this got me to thinking about why the McHenry County Sheriff’s Department would have such a unit. Who’s in it? What are the qualifications and training for deputies assigned to it? How does it function?

First, what is “Special Weapons and Tactics” (S.W.A.T.)?

S.W.A.T. is commonly an elite special operations tactical unit in American police departments. It is trained to perform high-risk operations that fall outside of the abilities of regular patrol officers, including serving high-risk arrest warrants, hostage rescue, counter-terrorism, and engaging heavily-armed criminals.

SWAT teams are often equipped with specialized firearms including assault rifles, submachine guns, shotguns, carbines, riot control agents, stun grenades, and high-powered rifles for snipers. They have specialized equipment including heavy body armor, entry tools, armored vehicles, advanced night vision optics, and motion detectors for covertly determining the positions of hostages or hostage takers inside of an enclosed structure.

Watch for a follow-up article about the McHenry County SWAT team.

The source of a portion of the above information is Wikipedia, which allows copying of its content.