Sheriff Cole Buttresses the Fort

[XLFD]

The office of county sheriff is the highest, and only, level of law enforcement elected in our state.  As such, the office demands a higher degree of accountability for their actions than a city's police or the state's troopers which are ultimately guided, hired, and fired by other civil officials. 

When off-duty trooper, Sammy Seymour, was pulled over for a traffic stop by the Ludington Police Department on January 17 shortly after 2:00 AM in Ludington, Kim Septrion, his sister, was in the back seat just a few blocks from her home.  She had committed no crime, nor was she suspected when she got out of the car to talk with her brother who was handcuffed and put in the LPD's vehicle. 

Yet she was treated like a criminal when she was victimized shortly after the arrival of Deputy Mike Fort of the sheriff's department.  Civilized people do not grab people from behind without any verbal warning, civilized people with badges do not force people into a confined and locked space when they pose no threat to anyone and are guiltless. 

Civilized people do not send out sheriff's reports that leave off salient facts of a traffic stop like the Mason County Sheriff's Office did.  Civilized people do not hold unwarranted felony charges over a victim, when the person more akin to a felony is the person who assaulted, imprisoned and otherwise denied the basic civil rights everyone is entitled to. 

With that understood, I challenged another Kim to defend his deputy's treatment of this other KIm.  Sheriff Kim Cole, who should be fully accountable to the people of this county, failed the people of this county and the victim of his deputy's poor training and application.  Here is our E-mail exchanges over the last few days which shows that he does not want to have himself or his deputies accountable to us.

 

Feb 1 at 9:03 AM

Sheriff Cole,

I would like some comment on whether you condone the actions and words of Deputy Mike Fort on the night of January 17, 2015 where he appears to act against his training and normally accepted police practices in apprehending and dealing with Kimberly Septrion at the traffic stop of Septrion's brother, Sammy Seymour.

Please look at this article I wrote on Friday and offer your view on whether what he did that night was correct, and whether the detainment of Septrion and eventual actions taken were warranted, when she had clearly done nothing wrong, while your deputy seems to have done everything wrong: http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/mason-county-deputy-m...

I realize the actions pursued by Deputy Fort will probably become a legal dilemma for the county in short order; in the meantime can you explain why Kim Septrion deserves any criminal charges against her while Mike Fort has yet to have any against him? Thanks for any reply you can offer.

Feb 4 at 11:33 AM

Sheriff Cole,

You've had the better part of the week to be accountable for the actions of your rookie Mike Fort, whose criminal actions led to the possible loss of a productive member of our society, Kimberly Septrion, an emergency room worker, whom your deputy blatantly mistreated.

At the end of tomorrow, Thursday, I will be publishing an article on the Ludington Torch that you have decided to waive responsibility for the unlawful actions of your deputy, then next Tuesday, I will address the County Board as to the dereliction of duties that you and your rogue outfit that led to what happened on January 17, 2015.

If you still want to keep quiet on the illegal protocols your young deputy followed that night, I will tirelessly put you and your deputy up as examples to the world of what you allow in Mason County under the aegis of law enforcement and justice.

As one of the few administrative positions in the county that require accountability, you must come forth and tell why such treatment by your deputy is not contrary to the oath both of you swore to get in your positions of trust. And why Kimberly Septrion is not the person that needs to be disciplined here, but your new recruit.

Feb 5 at 8:33 AM

Mr. Rotta

I will not discuss this matter with you as you are not a party directly involved.

Feb 5 at 9:36 AM

Sheriff Cole,

Are not the 28,605 citizens of Mason County a party directly involved when their sheriff's office self-reportedly (and on camera) act erroneously and violate the civil rights of a productive member of our society?  Do not we all suffer at the potential loss of this valued medical professional, the unconstitutional loss of our liberties to the state, and especially for the perceived loss of an accountable and competent agency to enforce the laws in this county, who brazenly allow such transgressions to go forth?

I submit that I am a party directly involved because I and my county brethren have subsidized the actions of Deputy Mike Fort that night and will subsidize the legal liability he has subjected us to in his illegal actions that night.  As a party directly involved, speaking to an elected official that I help subsidize and whose duties include providing information to the public, I demand an explanation.  Is this how you train your officers?  Is this what you expect from your officers?  Is this what we should expect from our sheriff's department?

Feb 5 at 9:46 AM

Tom,

Again, you are not directly involved in this matter and I will not discuss it with you. If Ms. Septrion or her attorney wish to discuss it, my door is open.

[XLFD]

Sergeant Cole was a road officer whose political power was the promise to his peers to give them more money and more toys with less scrutiny and less restrictions-- a typical progressive in conservative clothing.  His loyalty to his fellow officers will not allow him to do the right thing in situations like this, because if he did he would be sorely weakening his political base, which translates as positive to most of the less-involved electorate. 

[AQUAMAN]

What's the definition of, "restoring pride, tradition, and honor to this office"? More expensive tires for cars, cleaning up a shower, remodeling the break room, fixing leaky faucets and plumbing, fixing tired patrol boat engines, more safety vests? Oh yeah, and more union pay increases and paid leave, mustn't forget that. The pledge for office shouldn't just be window dressing for maintenance upkeep Sheriff Cole. It involves integrity in ALL of your officers, and setting the right example, by leading, not following, and covering up for brutality and excessive over-reactions to duty. You forget the information you gather and store, is for the people that elected you. It's theirs for the asking. You are simply a temporary steward of that information.  Hiding it from the public simply puts more spotlight on you, and creates more suspicion, and that's not honorable sir. If in fact you say your door is open, then quit hiding behind it! Actions speak louder than cheap frivolous words anyday.

[XLFD]

Everyone should be insulted that the sheriff finds it below himself to explain the actions of his deputies when their actions are so egregiously wrong. 

Honor according to the sheriff apparently amounts to having your officers accost and imprison innocent drunk middle age women, then charge them with crimes when they doth protest too much. 

Pride according to the sheriff apparently amounts to the lack of humility.  As St. Augustine said:  "It was pride that changed angels into devils; it is humility that makes men as angels."

Tradition according to the sheriff apparently amounts to saying that his methods, policies and politics will not ever change despite the injustices suffered by too many of our innocent citizens in a harsh local system. 

It's too bad Cole didn't have more room to tout himself, he could have included the other six deadly sins.

[stump]

We all know he's dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't, he chose not to say anything.

[XLFD]

Granted, but the response (or lack thereof) show exactly where his loyalties stand.  He would rather stand with his deputy, even if the facts shows he should ethically do otherwise.  Taking the Fifth as an elected public official usually isn't a good political choice unless you've charmed all of the local media.

[Willy]

The Sheriff may have been advised by legal council not to discuss the incident because he and the County fear a lawsuit. Having said that, it is the Sheriff's responsibility to issue some kind of statement about what happen and give any details he can. His response should not have been to tell you, in so many words, that it is none of your business. He must give the citizens some explanation. Let's not forget that the way Ms. Septrion was treated is how the law officers are trained to handle intoxicated people who they consider uncooperative and she bares a lot of the responsibility for what happened to her. She should have stayed in the car but her actions set off a series of events that landed her in jail. Law enforcement must rethink how they handle people and should be retrained accordingly.

[XLFD]

It's sound legal strategy not to comment, practiced often by our public officials-- but its also unsound politics; a public official can at least assure the public that the actions are being investigated and will be addressed if violations are found. 

Here, Sheriff Cole effectively said it is nobody's business other than the victim's and her attorney's.  That is incorrect.  As for Septrion, she was allegedly ordered to stay in the car, but that was by no means a 'lawful order' by Officer Wietrzykowski given that she was not under suspicion of any crime.  It would be equivalent to Trooper Sammy trying to 'pull rank' and telling Officer Wietrzykowski to stay in his car.  

A well-trained deputy would have used words to let her know that she was not part of the investigation and calm her down, not immediately go to forcible restraint without speaking a word.  Wietrzykowski's mistake that night was to allow the MCSO rookie deputy to interfere with his investigation in such manner.