Unlawfully Detained Ludington Woman Fights for Freedom, Loses

[XLFD]

As reported in the City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNews). a Ludington woman was stopped by a Ludington Police Department officer at 2:19 AM on early Saturday morning.  As seen in the following headline, the woman not only assaulted an officer, but kicked out the window of a sheriff's car:

This and the next snippet can be found here.  Reading the body of the report one actually finds that the woman apparently did not kick the back window out of the sheriff's car, only attempted to.  But this Torch article is not based solely on this misreport by the COLDNews, unless they further misrepresented other facts.  Please read carefully the synopsis below, and see whether you can spot a red flag:

Did you spot the area of concern, which any reasonable reporter would question, but the material is copied and pasted from the sheriff's weekend activity report, so it doesn't get a second glance from the COLDNews. 

The woman was pulled over for a traffic stop at 2:19 AM by LPD, probably because they suspected her of DWI.  That was never determined, however, there is no traffic infraction noted, just the two offenses of resisting/opposing and attempted MDOP (malicious destruction of property).  Somehow, she winds up in the back of a MCSO deputy's car before she tries to kick out the back window and before she assaulted an LPD officer and 'resisted' a county deputy. 

So what we have is a 44 year old Ludington woman guiltless of any reported crime other than belligerence (which isn't a crime, just so you know) after she was detained in the back of a MCSO car. 

Why was she in the back of the patrol car in the first place?  Why was the MCSO vehicle there, since there appeared to be no problem, not even a civil infraction, until she was illegally detained and put in the back of that patrol car?  Why is our sheriff's office putting people in the back of their patrol car, presumably against their will (hence the window kicks), when they have done nothing wrong?  Might you react the same way the woman did if you were getting the same treatment?

As reported, the Ludington lady was assaulted herself, unlawfully detained, unlawfully arrested, and unlawfully imprisoned.  And let's not forget, the reporter is the sheriff himself, who writes the headlines that they would like you to see and believe, as in the Facebook header:

[Willy]

In all fairness we really don't know what happened. She might have been on the phone and was swerving a bit so the officers thought she was DWI. When she was stopped she may have told the officer to go f_ himself.  Your right about the police report not matching the information in the LDN. This type of reporting is inexcusable and happens all to often. They might as well be a bunch of teenagers running a school paper out of their parents basement but I wouldn't even give them that much credit. It will be interesting to find out what took place and why she was arrested. The picture above looks like the officer is being a little to friendly with his prisoner.

[XLFD]

Admittedly, the report does leave off details, but the report was taken verbatim from the sheriff's own report which gives no offense the women did other than what happened after her detainment.  That's why I say that reportedly, the details show a colossal disregard for the rights of the woman without giving any indication of why these rights were violated.  It's rather meaningful when the report writer is the MCSO, and so that's why I have made a FOIA request for the reports and any dashcam footage. 

My belief is similar to yours, that she was either verbally abusive to the LPD, or tried to assert her lawful rights, and then the ever-present MCSO came around or was summoned, and the vague disorderly person and or resisting an officer was invoked by the LPD, enforced by the deputy's help.  She was put in the back of the car and resented it.  Once I get the reports, or even sooner, I'll at least get a name to find out her side of the story.  

[XLFD]

Here's more that just came down the creek, this is a bigger story, courtesy of the COLDNews:

State police trooper arrested on drunken driving charge; sister arrested for assault, attempt to kick out patrol car window

Ludington police arrested a 41-year-old Michigan State Police trooper for drunken driving at 2:11 a.m. Saturday at Loomis and Delia streets in Ludington.

Police also arrested a 44-year-old Ludington woman for assault, resisting and opposing police and malicious damage to police property during the same traffic stop.

Arrested were Sammy Seymour, 41, of Ludington, and his sister, Kimberly Septrion, 44, of Ludington.

Ludington Police Chief Mark Barnett said Seymour was observed driving on S. James Street and then east on Filer Street without headlights before being pulled over.

He was then arrested for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated and possessing an open intoxicant.

Seymour’s bond was set at $2,500, 10 percent and he posted bond.

The Mason County Sheriff’s Office assisted with the arrests and Sheriff Kim Cole said Septrion became belligerent and attempted to kick out the back window of a patrol car. She then reportedly assaulted a Ludington police officer and resisted arrest by a sheriff’s deputy.

Septrion’s bond was set at $3,500, 10 percent and she posted bond

[XLFD]

Funny, the sheriff's report has no mention of the Michigan State Police Trooper driving drunk, allegedly, but even with this expanded story, Kimberly Septrion still has no reason to be put in the back of the sheriff's car against her will; she wasn't even operating the motor vehicle when it was stopped.

Trooper Seymour is pictured to the left, as he appeared at the recent McCallum trial.

[John Doe Jr]

Sammy was arrested last year, and on leave for domestic violence. Him and sister were down by marina getting drunk. When they got pulled over his sister came unglued, so they threw her in the cop car, where she then went bizerk. This all would have been kept out of papers and hush hush if the sister didn't tell others.

[John Doe Jr]

Choices, choices,choices' Isn't that what the sheriff always says? I am appalled! And, the prosecuting attorneys office secretary says, "why would you want to video tape the police? I am appalled!" Well, I hope you and your office reads this and gets a clue. You are not fooling anyone around here who knows better. And, the nerve of your reverse attacks to good people appalls me to no end.

[John Doe Jr]

Rob sitting there chewing his nails off waiting for the real lies to call him so he can post something pro police. Keep waiting Rob!!

[AQUAMAN]

It's called "protect and serve" Streeter, and most informed locals know whom is being protected and served the most, and it sure isn't the local taxpayers, it's their own. This story is a prime example of what goes on daily in the field, and in the COLDNEWS, behind the scenes where hush hush is usually a given.

[AQUAMAN]

Ah ha, Streeter puts a lot more info. out there for us now, thanks. I figured there was more to the story, always being hidden from the public. So it's the sister's stupidity that elevated this situation to it's current peak. If she had just stayed mute and relaxed during the stop, perhaps the entire matter would have been dropped, with a verbal warning no less. As it stands now, no hush hush will work. Or at least it shouldn't. Depends on the MC Prosecutors office now. Will they drop all this, or pursue it to it's legal conclusion? Time will tell if a conspiracy of sorts will still work. As it stands now, Cole isn't being objective nor truthful in his original report, again showing that his dishonesty and covering up for other officers is his highest priority, above what the law dictates to every citizen, even law enforcement officers, and that's not ethical at all imho.

[XLFD]

Sheriff Kim Cole's cover-up attempt apparently was thwarted by the sister who wasn't willing to take the rap all by herself.  Streeter's scenario was what I had deduced from the known facts.  The LPD and the MCSO would have gladly covered up this black eye on law enforcement by Tpr. Seymour if he had been driving drunk alone. 

Now you have to wonder if State-Police-Award-Winning Prosecutor Paul Spaniola will have the objectivity and stones to enforce the law at least equally on the MSP trooper.  History says he won't, because he only has skewed subjectivity and ova.

[John Doe Jr]

So,  drunk driving and a domestic offense in his history.  Shouldn't he lose his gun permit. Have police taken his weapon yet?

[wildfire]

He should get his badge, his gun, all taking away and he should go to jail for drunk driving everyone else has to when they are caught, and put it on his record, and finger print him and take his picture, and if its his second time  he can go away longer and lose his cop job, and if its his 3rd he goes to prison for a few yrs isn't it? He doesn't need to be treated any diffence just because hes got a badge, cause all that is , is a peace of metal with a pin on the back, So I agree with you Johnyes he should lose his gun premit .