Thursday, July 3, 2014

Can a sheriff's department lie about firing a deputy?

Is anyone else outraged by the deal that Zane Seipler was able to cut with the McHenry County Sheriff's Department to end his Federal lawsuit against MCSD and Nygren for wrongful termination?

On McHenry County Blog Cal Skinner wrote, "The agreement with McHenry County also changed the reason for Seipler’s leaving the Sheriff’s Department from termination to having resigned. The status with the Illinois Training and Standards Board is now resigned not terminated. A letter of recommendation was included.

"The release and settlement agreement may be read here.  Seipler signed on May 28th, attorney Horwitz on June 2nd, Sheriff Keith Nygren on June 9th, Tina Hill on June 12th  and county attorney James Sotos on June 16th."

What's wrong with those two paragraphs or, rather, the shady dealings behind the words?

Nygren fired Seipler. Wrongfully. How can they truthfully now say otherwise? The answer is that they aren't being truthful. When Sheriff Nygren signs a dishonest statement (agreement), what does that make him? Is it a crime for a County elected official to sign a false statement? Is it unlawful for MCSD to issue a "resigned" cause for Seipler's departure? Can a Sheriff's Department lie and, thus, sandbag a future employer?

Is this the "Gotcha"?

And what about County Board Chair Tina Hill? When she signed a false statement/agreement, was that a crime? Did the Board approve her signing the Agreement?

Who will investigate? Certainly not the Sheriff's Department. The State's Attorney? Probably not. The Illinois State Police? Not likely. The Illinois Attorney General. Not likely. The U.S. Attorney? Maybe. Eric Holder? Altogether now, laugh... 1-2-3...Laugh!

When James Sotos signed on June 16, what was his capacity? Not "county attorney". Try private, high-paid, outside counsel for Keith Nygren. And maybe Keith hired him at County taxpayer expense to represent MCSD and the MCSD employees named in Seipler's lawsuit.

I understand Zane's desire to get a clean exit from MCSD and, especially, to get out from under a change of lying in Federal Court and the levy that Judge Kapala (or was it Judge Mahoney) improperly, in my opinion, placed against Zane for lying in court. If the good judge thought Zane lied, then perjury charges should have following, not a "sanction" for a few hundred thousand dollars.

Now, with a clean resignation from MCSD and a letter of recommendation, will Zane apply for a job as a deputy sheriff with MCSD?


Big Daddy said...

Gus, one thing I have learned recently is that these Sheriff Departments are as corrupt, incompetent and mismanaged as hell. I'm not talking about the field officers but the Command Staff's instead. Perhaps I will call you one day and explain further.

Jim Jones said...

It's called a civil case negotiated deal; similar to a criminal one. DooDoo occurs.

Gus said...

Any judge who approves a request to allow a government body to alter the truth and report false reasons for separation of an employee ought to be kicked off the bench.

Jim Jones said...

You start with the premise that Zane's version us the truth about what happened. Maybe it wasn't. He DID agree to this.

Gus said...

Jim, I haven't spoken with or communicated with Zane about this deal. Of course, he would agree with it. It solved a huge financial liability, preserved monies received, and got him a free pass to keep doors from being slammed in his face in the future.

Not sure how he'll explain four years worth of newspaper articles and blogs, but ...

Too bad he didn't have the money to keep fighting.

Jim Jones said...

I agree I would have liked to see it to the end, if for no other reason than for a judge to decide who's not being truthful. I also often wondered who was funding his challenges and paying for his lawyer. As a lowly deputy he didn't make that much money so someone was backing him, money wise. The obvious thought was that it was also someone who wanted the Sheriff's dept brought down, no matter what.

Gus said...

Jim, I believe Zane was on his own. He had incredible documentation of racial profiling by MCSD deputies. The superiors at MCSD wouldn't act to stop it.

Nygren claimed he didn't fire Seipler because of racial profiling. Yet one of Nygren's own attorneys told Judge Mahoney that was the exact reason Seipler was fired!

There's no "smoking gun" here. With the sanction imposed, Zane didn't have a choice. He had to make a deal and bail out. Read his explanation on McHenry County Blog.