New Kills and Cover-Ups by the Manistee Police Department

[XLFD]

Over this weekend, a Battle Creek police officer named Kris Brown came out in their local media talking of his experiences in being tested and being found positive for having COVID-19.  Chief Jim Blocker said Brown was the first in the department to contract the coronavirus and, as officers and staff learned about it, "you could feel it was a sobering moment.  The community responding to the story were very receptive to the officer wishing him the best of luck in his recovery.

The night before, the Manistee Police Department (MPD) at 8:42 PM announced that two of their officers tested positive for the virus.  They announced having contacted all those who may have been exposed to these officers; only four additional officers were put into quarantine but nobody else.  Neither of the two officers were identified, nor were there any hints as to how they operated over the last few weeks without having any other exposures than fellow police officers, nor how they may have contracted the virus in a county with only two other cases known.

These six represent about half of the patrol officers of the MPD likely to have seen themselves intervening in several domestic assault and battery reports (and many others) plaguing the city during the 'stay home, stay safe' orders from the governor.  It's hard to not imagine them having multiple close contact encounters over that time in their likely 80 hours or more of police work.

And in the microscopic chance that wasn't the case, these various incidents did involve one or more MPD officers intervening and putting themselves at risk, and potentially putting the citizens at risk.  Had MPD Officer John Smith needed to write you a citation, take a statement from you, or slap handcuffs on you, you had the potential to contract the virus from him.  Wouldn't it be helpful to know whether Smith was one of the dangerous two so that you could quarantine yourself, or one of the 'safe' ones, so you could relax?

I (Xavier Luft) posed a form of this question to the MPD on their Facebook page amid the four dozen comments offering the usual prayers and get well wishes to the unknown officers, I got the not entirely unexpected responses claiming they were not required to by HIPAA, which only I could spell correctly and look at closely in regards to there being pandemic conditions existing:

A recent reminder of HIPAA and the Coronavirus by the DHHS states that "Health care providers may share patient information with anyone as necessary to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to the health and safety of a person or the public – consistent with applicable law".  One would think that either of the two 'Public Safety' officers would consent voluntarily to having their names disclosed so that the risk to those they had made contact with in performance of their official duties would be able to consider their options to go into quarantine.  They and the MPD would get directed sympathy and support from the public for being so proactive and open.

Likewise, one would think that MPD Chief Tim Kozal, who leaves Manistee PD for Ludington PD in two weeks, would have the qualities of leadership to release those names as a public service, so that everybody who made contact with MPD units over the last two weeks could make an informed decision as to whether they should take extra precautions or not.  Ignorance leads to panic, panic leads to compromised immune systems.  

Rather than address my question, the moderator of the MPD page removed my post and decided to claim that it was because it involved harassment, threats and/or name-calling in a comment they used to replace my question.  I guess praying for a quick, uneventful recovery for the officers is seen as a threat or something, and protection for their families is harassment:

The MPD as noted, maintains a Facebook page that serves as a public forum.  As a public entity sworn to uphold and defend the state and federal Constitutions, those two documents contain a certain amendment that protects speech and expression from government intervention.  I asked a question, and have been ignored:

"If a public agency uses an account as an extension of their office, the First Amendment prohibits you from blocking people from the account—or suppressing or deleting their comments, or otherwise penalizing them—because of their viewpoints.
Multiple courts have held that social media accounts used for official purposes are “public forums” within the meaning of the First Amendment. A “public forum” is established when the government invites members of the public to speak in a space that the government owns or controls. Courts have held that the interactive features of social media accounts used for official purposes make those accounts public forums for First Amendment purposes because they enable members of the public to speak by, for example, replying to tweets or posting comments.  

Manistee City Police Department, why did you delete my comment asking a public policy question and urging recovery for the two officers you will not name?"

It stands to reason that the leadership of the Manistee Police Department, Chief Tim Kozal, who is scheduled to become the Ludington police chief on April 17, does not only believe that the basic rights and life of Lee Pat Milks was not important, at least not as important as full and complete exoneration of Officer Dougie "Homicidal Trespasser" Vansickle by using false records and narratives, but also that my right to ask a humble question and express concern about two officers under his control was somehow threatening or harassing.  

Perhaps an even worse thing, however, is that he is not concerned with giving the public information it should have in this time of national crisis, where he may become responsible for creating a breeding ground for panic or more COVID-19 cases by his lack of sound judgment in what may be his last major decision as chief of MPD.

[shinblind]

X.

Stumbled upon this in my daily trek that has a lot of similarities with Manistee and you.

https://wgrt.com/federal-lawsuit-filed-against-port-huron-city-mana... 

[XLFD]

Filed by my attorney buddy, Phil Ellison who secured the City of Ludington admitting to an Open Meetings Act violation back in 2013.  Port Huron is going to lose.  Manistee is going to lose too, maybe I'll have to give Ellison a call this week.  Thanks for the find.

[XLFD]

Found the lawsuit that Ellison filed, simple but elegant.

[Freedom Seeker]

Thanks for info shinblind and X. Does the City of Ludington still delete unwanted Facebook posts?

[XLFD]

The new policy under Mitch Foster is that they will only delete posts and block members that fail to meet the platform's community standards test (in general, using threats, calling names, or harassing people on Facebook).  Ludington still falls short in other tests, I'm still blocked in some of their public Facebook group forums for no reason other than my comments or I annoy Heather and the police chief; I will be encouraging Foster to observe everybody's right of speech once Tim Kozal gets here, I've given him a pass on it so far figuring he would do the right thing.  He hasn't yet, he has only unblocked me from one of the City-maintained pages rather than all of them.  

[Willy]

Thanks for the info X and your link shinblind. The hiring of MPD chief opens a wide window as to what is going on with Ludington politics. His hiring is the direct result of Ludington's political underbelly. Why else would an administrator such as he be hired if not to help cover up the corruption that is permeating Ludington. He is a perfect match for the likes of John Shay. His lack of transparency is obvious so why hire this man? Those who truly control Ludington want to maintain that control. What better person to hire than a chief who is secretive, hides behind a closed door bureaucracy and puts roadblocks in front of every effort to reveal the truth. It might be that Manistee is happy to see him go. Who knows what trouble he has caused there. Shame on Ludington City Council and the Mayor for allowing another Shay to occupy a place of power in Ludington.

[XLFD]

I am most interested in the reason(s) that made Kozal seek out this lateral move, when most indicators point to him not having many problems in Manistee from the public or his own personnel.  The most I could get from the city manager in an informal chat after the recent north-lawn meeting was that Kozal's reasons were on a personal level.  I hope for our sake that he was sick of the corruption in Manistee and saw Foster as a much better person and city manager than Thud Taylor, whose days are numbered, IMHO, even if I were not to file a federal lawsuit for his city's most recent violation of my civil rights.  

[Willy]

We still have to question why the newly hired chief was not publicly vetted about the  controversial killing of Milks and why there is no record of any private vetting if that did take place. Let's just assume the new Chief was good guy and on the wrong side of Manistee's politics and wanted out of the situation. That still doesn't answer his evasive tactics of not fully informing the public. If he was forced to remain silent and complied then is this the man to lead Ludington's law enforcement? Also how is it possible for an officer who was involved with a questionable killing of a citizen being awarded a Medal of Honor. I suppose it's possible he received the award for doing an excellent job of issuing traffic tickets. The City Manager's answer that Kozal left for personal reasons falls far short of concerns about how he handled the killing of a citizen by one of his employees. To me, Kozal is a hot potato that has landed in Ludington.  There must be plenty of other qualified candidates that do not have such baggage to carry from one town to another.

[Freedom Seeker]

... a close little town too, with heavy baggage coming to Ludington.  I've been contemplating the same too, Willy.  If Kozal was forced to exonerate Van Sickle and wanted out of Manistee, then our vetting team may not have been concerned about ethics.  Or they believe Van Sickle was justified.  Then it would seem they don't see the big picture of notifying an individual of a code violation with proper correspondence, let alone an individual's right to his property and privacy without a search warrant.  Either way, Kozal doesn't seem justified to have exonerated VanSickle for so many mistakes:   1) improper code violation notification (none), 2) trespassing when asked to leave, 3) not having his car video or body cam on during the incident, 4) according to Milks, shooting when Milks gun wasn't even pointed (we will never know because no video on at the critical time), 5) blowing Milks away with seven bullet entrances, only two bullets were left in Milks body, so according to the autopsy, five shots must have blown right through Milks.  That definitely is shoot to kill over having his RV in his backyard.  The supplemental material X supplied is frightfully enlightening, especially about the autopsy, and how Van Sickle appeared without notification or warrant when he should have had plenty of previous records of incidences on file at the click of a computer search on the equipment in his car.  After reading all that, it just appears that the ex-marine was out to put Milks down from the start, or at minimum to start an aggravated eencounter.  And for this, Kozal commended him? Is this how Manistee operates?  Every citizen in Ludington should be concerned of this heavy baggage.

[Willy]

I agree FS. I haven't been able to view the autopsy report but being a sport shooter I know all to well that when using a firearm it is imperative to know where the rounds can travel and with so many shots fired, Vansickle put the public at risk by having the possibility of stray bullets injuring innocent neighbors. For this alone he should have been reprimanded. If only 2 rounds were recovered then where did the others go? Another question I have is how many exit wounds were on Milks' body. Vansickle should also have been reprimanded for trespassing when asked to get off private property and for escalating the situation.

[stump]

 I the report it stated he was shot 7 times. So only 2 bullets recovered in his body. I believe  Milks was inside his porch behind a closed storm door when shot. That's just my opinion. Remaining bullets ? probably in the front door.

[XLFD]

Consider:  1) the report says that Officer Haner secured Milks' gun on scene, but Milks' gun is not seen in the video before Haner moves the vehicle and nothing is on camera for three minutes, at which point nothing on Haner's mike suggests he picked up a gun  2) Nor is there any gun when he crosses before the camera and moves the camera to focus on Milks' area, throughout this time he can be seen on camera without the sizable gun Milks was claimed to have been wielding.  3)  There is an order to "Grab that Gun!" once Haner goes inside Milks' house with two others and it sounds in the video like he was picking something up shortly thereafter.  They came out with a bag.  

With that in mind, it appears that Milks' threatening gun was inside the house, while he was found lying moments after being shot quite a distance away from the front door!   Noting his history of getting in the face of law enforcement without wielding a firearm, the introduction of a gun into the narrative may have been to protect Vansickle from the charge of trespassing and shooting an unarmed 73 year old man seven times on his front lawn just for aggressively walking towards him.