Sheriff Cole: Holding Johnson Accountable

[XLFD]

"Justice without force is powerless; force without justice is tyrannical."
Blaise Pascal

 

Kim Cole make the following comment in the above Daily News article concerning Todd Johnson being arraigned on a CSC felony:  "It was ongoing for several years and started when the player was 13.  It did not take place at the school or involve any school activities.  It took place in a home in Amber Township."  Ummm, Sheriff Cole, you just referred to the victim as a player, whereby one would have to presume she played on one or more of Johnson's soccer teams.  That further implies that school activities and the school were part and parcel to this

 

But in the second page of this FOIA appeal denial for investigatory records sought by myself on this case just last month, Sheriff Cole states: 

"The release of the contents of this investigation would additionally deprive the supect and the proecutor to the right of a fair trial which would include the dissemination of inadmissable evidence to the jury pool... information is contained in the police report...the release of which would clearly taint the jury pool, perhaps in its entirety.  Evidentiary materials are included in the police report, if released publicly and not in a courtroom, would taint the jury pool and cast certain witnesses in an unfair light."

 

Saying that the alleged illegal activities (oops, Sheriff Cole never used that "alleged" word) was ongoing for several years between Johnson and this young soccer player is not tainting the jury pool by casting the accused in an unfair light?  Sheriff Cole is saying this felonious penetration by Coach Johnson into some parents' 13 year old daughter was happening over a period of years away from school and school activities-- without pointing at a single shred of the evidence that he is hoarding away from the public in the interest of fairness.  Apparently, Sheriff Cole still hasn't read that Fourth Amendment part of the Constitution since his dealing with Martin Schilling.  Time to get out the ducking stool.

[easymoney]

there could be alot of factors, that we will never know, maybe the girl thought things would progress to the next level?

Old saying " nothing worse than a woman scorned." Wouldn't be the first case of hurtful revenge.

[XLFD]

Something had her going after him for this serious charge, and something had her retract her prior testimony.  The woman scorned motif, is probably close to the truth, one who later learn that her statements can have the opposite effects than what she wanted to do.  I hope she not only uses it as a learning experience, but that Johnson and Sheriff Cole learn from it too. 

[AQUAMAN]

Willy and easy, I see both your points in this travesty. However, the main thing now is that a local man's name and reputation, in a small town with too many rumor mongers, has  been tainted and defamed. Both in the interest of a new Sheriff wanting media attention, and reckless prosecutor going too far, with poor evidence and a scorned witness. The defendant has every right to be silent and not comment, one way or the other, that's his right. It's also his right to sue the county for damages beyond reasonable limits of pursuing justice for the people. If no suit is pursued, these same people are going to continue repeating the same mistakes in the future without any conscience for the aftermath. If interviews of the mistaken people took place right now, I'd be willing to bet they would sweep it  under the rug of just another "technicality".

[XLFD]

Police and prosecutors with questionable ethics from all over have learned that they can get better 'success rates' for their prosecutions of high profile crimes if they utilize the media correctly, particularly media outlets that are quick to parrot the official line. 

In Mason County, we have got into a 'perfect storm' of reputation-ruiners with the City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNews), Prosecutor Spaniola, and the current heads of our police organizations.  And let's not forget those developers of Ludington's Workplace Safety Policy at the Ludington City Hall, who never follow their own rules, but make unnecessary new ones for the public all the time.

[AQUAMAN]

Technicality or not, the fact remains that a defendant declared innocent and whose case was "dismissed entirely and with finality"  had a funky/weak/stupid case presented, prosecuted, and the defendant WON! Meanwhile, the famous media Sheriff and County Prosecutor will NOT be punished nor even suspended/sanctioned/punished/laid off for ANY infractions per the Law, and just common sense/courtesy! And we call this Justice served? These guys walk around all over town and the media, and talk of Justice, and do we actually have to believe it's in what's in their interpretation of it? Or should it be unbiased and substantiated to the degree of beyond the shadow of a doubt as Law prescribes? Think about it, lest it be any of us that may face such scrutiny and libelous accusations! An obvious case of wrongful taxpayers monies gone wild, beyond all reasonableness expected for such lofty and overpaid officials, imho.

[Willy]

What are the sheriff and prosecutor suppose to do when a woman files charges of being sexually molested when she was 13? Ignore her? They had no choice. That's one of the reason why sexual victims should take a lie detector to see if their story is valid and the man's name should not be released until the lie detector has been given and passed. If this girl had not changed her story, Johnson would still be facing a prison sentence.
After re-reading the above articles it appears that something about this story is askew. If the girl graduated in 2011 that would make her around 19 or 20 now and since Johnson has been the coach for 3 years that would mean he was having sex with the girl 2 years prior to him coaching the girls team, that is, if she was 13 when this all started. That means that she joined the team after the sexual liason began. I still say that the Sheriff and prosecuter must do a complete investigation of this incident including giving a lie detector test to both individuals involved.

[XLFD]

The limitations of our local investigation teams in the Ludington Police Department and the Mason County Sheriff's Office can be best illustrated by the conflicted investigations into the death of Lingyan Zao at the marina and the death of Darius Vanbrook.  The incompetence and inconsistency of both can best be illustrated by the Baby Kate case.  Sure, they have gotten a conviction of the father in that case, but their reluctance to reveal any of the records (even ones they have given out publicly in court) bespeaks to me that there is a lot of other errors and myopia behind the investigation into that case. 

[XLFD]

Kudos to the COLDNews Brian Mulherrin for actually reporting the news, instead of processing it like they almost always seem to do, according to the 19 y.o. victim, there was no sexual relationship at all.  This should make the investigatory records I eventually get on this even more interesting: 

The criminal sexual conduct case against former Mason County Central girls soccer coach Todd Johnson was dismissed on Wednesday after the alleged victim’s testimony.
She had given two different statements to police, she testified, indicating Wednesday they did not have a sexual relationship.

The 19-year-old woman said she met Johnson because she was a friend of his daughter’s and then played soccer for him during her sophomore, junior and senior years.

The woman took the stand during the preliminary examination by 79th District Court Judge Pete Wadel.

“Did you and Mr. Johnson have a sexual relationship?” Mason County Prosecuting Attorney Paul Spaniola asked.

“No,” the woman answered.

Spaniola asked the woman if she had an interview with Mason County Sheriff’s Office Detective Tom Posma on Sept. 2, 2012 at 9:30 p.m.

She indicated she had.

Spaniola asked her if she indicated during that interview that she had a sexual relationship with Johnson that began when she was 13 years old.

“Yes, but I gave two statements,” she said.

Spaniola told her that wasn’t the question.

“Did you tell the truth during that interview?

“No,” she answered.

“Why didn’t you tell the truth?”

“Me and (name withheld) were worried about what was going to happen to us,” she said.

“In other words, you’re saying you lied to Detective Posma when you said you had a sexual relationship?”

The woman answered yes.

Spaniola then tried to ask her about her knowledge of perjury, drawing objections from defense attorney Gary Springstead, which led to a recess.

When Judge Wadel returned to the bench, Spaniola asked the woman if she was aware there are consequences for not telling the truth in a court of law.

She answered yes.

The woman explained she felt pressured during the Sept. 2 interview because of “various people.”

“That caused you to be untruthful to him?” Spaniola asked.

“Yes,” she answered.

Spaniola then asked her about an Aug. 31 interview.

“Did you indicate in that statement that you had a sexual relationship that started after you reached the age of 18?”

“Yes,” she answered.

Spaniola then became visibly flustered and asked the woman what the truth was, saying he didn’t care if it helped his case or hurt his case, but that he wanted the truth.

The woman said she thought Spaniola was asking about her second statement when he asked about a sexual relationship, which she said was untrue.

Wadel then stated that he did not believe, given testimony, that there was probable cause to bind the case over to circuit court and dismissed the case.

Johnson and Spaniola both declined comment after the dismissal.