Sheriff Cole or Lil Baby Kim?

[XLFD]

Mason County Sheriff Kim Cole is playing the victim card again.  In a Mason County Press article, an outlet that frequently allows him to vent his frustrations, titled 'Local Police Experiencing Backlash of National Negativity Especially Last Weekend', the sheriff complains about a couple of recent police events where his deputies and others were not treated with their required respect by those who were well within their rights to do what they were doing. 

He also mentions a New York City event erroneously, brings up the Butterfield shooting to elicit the usual "Our job is so dangerous" mantra he is known for, and then tells us of several incidents where the main point is lost.  There was no backlash, there was no national negativity causing the non-existent backlash.  The overall effect I as a reader received was that our elected sheriff is little more than a spoiled crybaby.  I include the text of the whole article with my own annotations in red and [bracketed].

  

By Rob Alway. Editor-in-Chief.

National exposure to events that have portrayed law enforcement in a negative light have influenced some recent interactions local law enforcement has had with the public, particularly over the past weekend. Mason County Sheriff Kim Cole said it’s fairly common place nowadays for police officers to be recorded on video camera, but, he said local law enforcement officers found themselves being frequently questioned and also being harassed by an area hotel employee last weekend. The sheriff said while the public has the right to record, there are boundaries that need to be observed.

[Boundaries that never actually get defined in the course of the article other than 'interference with an officer's job', which could cover just about anything the officer wants.]

“Our deputies are video taped every day,” Sheriff Cole said. “They pretty much expect it. I respect the public’s right to record but I also expect the public to be conscious of the job our officers need to do. When video recording interferes with an officer’s job then a line has been crossed. This is also true when an officer is interrupted in any way by someone when he or she is trying to do their job.”

[A line has been crossed when an officer is interrupted in any way by someone else?  Do they turn off their radios when they are doing their duties?  That can interrupt what an officer is doing too; maybe we should take dispatchers and other officers in for interference with an officer while on duty.]

This was the case at the Baymont Inn of Amber Township over the weekend. Sheriff Cole said a sheriff deputy was conducting a traffic stop and the subject pulled his vehicle into the hotel parking lot. While the officer was in the process of arresting the person, a hotel employee came outside and asked the deputy to leave, Cole said.

[The parking lot of the inn is private property, and although the public in general is allowed onto the lot in order to conduct business with the inn, the owner or their representative has the right to ask someone to leave their property.  A police officer in the performance of his duties also has certain powers to be there to effectuate an arrest when the arrestee has parked there, but if the action takes an extra long time, the officer's vehicle is blocking the entrance, the action takes place in the middle of the night interfering with their business, etc., the owner or his agents can express their concerns. 

'Interfering with their business'?  Isn't that what Sheriff Cole was just complaining about for his officers?]

“The deputy had to now take his attention away from the job of arresting a person and deal with the person who was interfering with the arrest,” Cole said. “This puts the deputy at an extreme risk and also puts the public at risk. After the deputy said he wasn’t going to leave, the employee left and then came back with another person, who again interrupted the deputy’s duty. This person then told the deputy that having his vehicle in the parking lot was bad for business.”

[Asking an officer to get off your private property is now interfering with an arrest?  Why weren't these hotel workers summarily arrested for resisting/opposing/obstructing a police officer?  Their concerns were valid, and did not interfere at all with the arrest.  For the sheriff to bring this out publicly further interferes with the hotel's business, particularly since the hotel staff was not given leave to comment in the article on what actually happened.]

Cole said there were other incidences in the City of Ludington where the public expressed a heightened suspicion of police activity.

[Perhaps all the local lawsuits filed against the LPD and Mason County Sheriff's Office for police brutality and other civil rights violations are contributing to this also...]

“We had a unit respond to a bar to back up Ludington Police Department. The subject was literally thrown out of the bar by a bouncer. A city police officer came over to the guy to help him up and to see if he was OK. At that moment, video cameras were immediately pulled out and the officer’s interaction with the subject was immediately recorded.

[The local officer's that brutalized Joe McAdam and Nancy Septrion eventually helped those innocent citizens up too; fortunately those interactions were recorded by the officer's own dashcams and showed their complicity in police brutality.  Video records are unbiased witnesses, and should be applauded by good law enforcement officers.] 

That is certainly their right, but also that same night citizens came up to police officers demanding that the police move their vehicles from the street. Our officers and deputies are doing their jobs and doing it within the confines of the law.

[If they had been  violating traffic and parking laws without needing to do so by responding to an emergency situation, they were in the wrong.  They need to park and travel with the same laws we do.  Anything else is outside the confines of the law, and I doubt citizens would make it an issue unless the police were in the wrong.]

“Do people not remember September 9, 2013 when a Michigan State Police trooper, Paul Butterfield, was murdered in this county?” Cole asked.

[Do people not remember January 15, 2014, when an innocent retired school teacher was murdered in his home by a Michigan State Police Trooper in this county?  What either of these has to do with the topic is beyond me.]

“Our local law enforcement would put their lives on the line to protect the people of this county. I watched a video recently of an arrest in New York City. It was being video recorded by multiple people and showed people actually coming up to police officers and attacking them while they were attempting to make an arrest. These officers were of multiple races. At one point, a woman attempted to grab one of the officer’s holstered sidearm. This is crossing the line.”

[I'm presuming the incident he speaks of is the one recorded here which just happened this week.  Though an inappropriate incident (perhaps from both sides) Cole misrepresents the actual facts.  This was a brother being arrested for having an open bottle of cognac, the sister thinking it was inappropriate started defending her brother from what she thought was a bogus charge; he in turn, started defending her.  No other people were involved other than the videographers who will likely help the officers make their case against the siblings.  This incident shows why it is important to have recordings of police/citizen interactions from the police standpoint.]

Cole said a few weeks ago, a deputy had pulled over a driver in the Custer area for speeding. At some point during the stop, after the deputy had checked the man’s records, they ended up both standing along the road and were sharing a story and a laugh together. “A woman pulled up several feet behind them, got out of her vehicle and began recording the interaction,” Cole said. “The man who was pulled over actually got upset and started asking the woman why she was recording them. He asked her to stop but she refused.”

[Whereas I can understand why a man may object to having his traffic stop recorded by others and shared wherever they might want, I applaud the woman for her actions as it was probably done in the spirit of keeping both parties honest.]

Cole said while the woman was within her rights to video record in public, people doing such things need to really question what their motivation is. They also need to follow the law themselves.

[Why do they need to question it, when you and your deputies already have?  Ask yourself why the City of Ludington decided to set up cameras in their bathrooms pointed at the stalls-- what was their motivation, and why did they break the law to do so for years.]

“The law enforcement officers in this county are good people. Scottville police, Ludington police, state police and the sheriff’s office. These are men and women who are out there everyday trying to keep the public safe. There is always going to be a certain percentage of the population that does not like or does not trust the police. But, we are thankful for the majority who recognize what we do and the risks we take. I am just asking that the public be conscious of the job at hand.”

[A person who records the police or expresses their concerns about police presence on their private property should not automatically be lumped together with those who do not trust or like the police.  Perhaps if you as a popularly elected sheriff held your officers to a higher standard of accountability and your citizenry to a higher standard of respect, we would not have to deal with a bunch of baseless whining like this article turns out to have. ]

http://www.masoncountypress.com/2015/06/25/local-police-experiencin...

[XLFD]

Good article.  Did you know that fire departments in the United States prior to about 1865 were not ran by local governments, but private fire brigades competing with one another to be the first to respond to a fire because insurance companies paid the first-responding brigade for saving a building?  These brigades would often refuse to offer their services in suppressing fires at uninsured buildings-- which led to the fire brigades becoming a public service throughout the country, being financed by cities and townships.

[Willy]

Interesting links Jasper. Thanks for finding and posting them.

[AQUAMAN]

Nick Swan has a serious conflict of interest when it comes to the MCSO. He has been the repair shop for police radios going back for at least 30+ years, and makes a financially lucrative contract with them for that. Whereas, Mr. Watkins apparently does not have such a contract, and appears to be speaking from personal experience and truth. Cole would rather squash any and all bystanders and persons that he and former deputies have trampled civil rights on over the years. The National cadence of awareness and reporting of bad cops has gained much support of recent. If indeed he and his deputies are always doing the job by the book, then he would have nothing to complain about. Imho, this is exactly the reason Cole is so upset, he doesn't want that stigma and awareness of truth going on around here at all. He is fighting an uphill battle, until and unless the behavior patterns at MCSO alter into the future. 

[XLFD]

Well stated, Aquaman.  Perhaps a better pulpit for Sheriff Cole in these cases would be for him to offer a little humility rather than hubris.  For example, when talking about the Baymont Inn incident he could have stressed how every citizen has a reasonable expectation for the MCSO to pay homage to their property rights when the MCSO in the course of their duties set foot on private property.  Instead, he acts as if the Baymont agent(s) was at risk for arrest for obstruction, reports the deputy belligerently asserts his power to be on the property, and states the officer and public was at great risk because of citizen concerns, which may have been proper concerns in the circumstance.

Then even though he admits the woman who recorded the traffic stop had every right to record the encounter, he asserts and implies that it's totally unnecessary with the good people the MCSO employs.  Tell that to innocent passengers Nancy Septrion and Joe McAdam who were caught on tape during traffic stops being attacked by four MCSO deputies/sergeants (Warmuskerken, Wilson, Davila, Fort). 

Their actions were bad enough, but the distrust is multiplied tenfold by the lack of anybody in the sheriff's department coming forth and saying it was unacceptable behavior.  This makes one think that there is not just one bad egg, but a whole department of zero-accountability bad eggs.

[Jasper]

Today a deputy from the Mason County Sheriff's Office obstructed traffic flow after pulling a driver over.  The driver pulled off of US-10 in the City of Scottville onto S. Reinberg, after this MCSO put his light's on.  

The driver pulled as far to the right of the street, but this Mason County Deputy obstructed traffic flow by parking his patrol vehicle half-way into the street, behind the pulled over vehicle.

A northbound vehicle stopped at the stop sign awaiting to turn left onto US-10 and due to Mr. Sheriff Deputy and his stopping in the middle of the street, instead of directly pulling behind the driver caused me to have to maneuver in between both vehicles.  I had to stop to assess whether I could even squeeze my vehicle between the squad car and the other vehicle.  

Thankfully, no other vehicle turned onto S. Reinberg unaware of this deputy obstructing the street, or I would have been rear-ended.  

In retrospect, I should have parked my vehicle and taken a video or pict's of this deputy who caused this obstruction of free traffic flow.  Oh, Kim Cole would have another whining tantrum!!!

This MCSO Deputy was a safety hazzard, and could have caused serious harm.  But, they "Serve and Protect."  Right???

[Jasper]

Cops have to get those quota's to generate the cash flow, even at the expense of possibly harming other driver's.  

[XLFD]

 I've heard of a couple of similar reports about vehicles from MCSO sticking their cars at angles out in the lane of traffic and I believe the rationale is for 'officer safety', but it winds up being a major traffic hazard and definitely obstructs the flow of traffic especially in the situation you mention. 

If you did the same maneuver, you would have an extra fine on your citation however these methods are approved for use by police (see #2 and #3) and are actually encouraged at accident scenes.  I can see the reasons why they might be useful in certain situations, and in your case the deputy's choice may have been wrong for that location. 

I don't know why the guy was stopped, but if it was for the usual minor traffic infractions like speeding, registration, or seat belt violations, I agree with you that the deputy would have been better advised to move it further down the street.  I can't count how many times I've seen these revenue-stops create traffic hazards and obstructions

[AQUAMAN]

Jasper, yes you are quite correct in that observation. I witnessed that deputies are now obstructing traffic too last summer at least 3 times during traffic stops, Not Accidents! I asked the MCSO for an explanation by phone. The crew at the office didn't seem to know why, and said they would ask and also alter actions into the future. Obviously, this is some new tactic, and it is very unsafe and causing confusion on the part of other traffic goers. Sooner or later, this new tactic is going to cause a very serious accident, not prevent one. 

[Jasper]

Irregardless of some supposedly approved "methods" of pulling someone over, this deputy from the Mason County Sheriff's Department endangered not only my safety, but the safety of other's with this "method."  

In all actuality, the deputy also endangered himself by pulling this "approved maneuver."  

Common sense surely did not prevail on this deputy's part.  He even risked his own safety!  But, he was "SERVING" a traffic violation, while not "PROTECTING" not only himself but the public.  SERVE AND PROTECT?" LOL!

[AQUAMAN]

We've seen videos on TV that have shown officers at a vehicle stop getting clipped by ongoing traffic when they are beside the stopped car. This so called "maneuver" seems to be aimed at protecting the officers while they are on the side of stopped cars, so they don't get clipped/hit. It may be good in theory, but in actuality, it's very unsafe and hazardous to other vehicles going by. And I think the MCSO is overdoing the maneuver by being too far out into the traffic lane. 

[XLFD]

The safest thing to do in the past was to pull into the nearest Baymont Motel parking lot, but then someone hurt the sheriff's feelings in telling his deputies to move along...

Along the same vein, here's something that might work.  Whenever you see a deputy/trooper/city cop pull someone over and park so as to cover the majority of the lane, park behind them off to the side of the road as you normally would, and start recording the traffic stop with commentary and key into the illegally parked police car.  Do not do this if an accident has occurred, only during revenue-generating stops, as they often have a valid reason to close off the lane if an accident happens.