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?
You never know who is interested…
3 months ago
1 comment:
I wish I had gone out of county for my attorney...
Post a Comment