The Place Where Ludington Talks

Kiddie Boots: Sheriff Cole Stages Another PR Stunt

Perhaps you have seen the latest press release from the Mason County's Sheriff's Office (MCSO). While you likely haven't seen the actual press release, if you tuned into some of the local news and radio stations today you've undoubtedly seen the release in a form packaged by Mason County's two main media outlets. the City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNews) and the Mason County Press (MCP).

The MCP got the initial story out entitled Parents’ shoplifting leads to deputies buying shoes for their kids which told of us how privileged we are to have such a great MCSO. The article in the COLDNews: Mason County Sheriff's Office crew buys shoes for childre... was a bit shorter, and didn't tell any more other than the title of the person who approached the sheriff.

Half a day after the MCP article a lot of Michigan news outlets ran with the story, either borrowing from the MCP or the COLDNews accounts, including the following:

GR Radio Station 95.7

Did this story go media-viral organically as it is made to look, or was their a concerted effort made by the MCSO to get some positive recognition for themselves on the eve of a sheriff's election year, when many of the MCSO's actions have come under criticism by many in the Mason County public (but never in the two media mentioned)?

I assert the belief that the events were staged, not much unlike the Black Friday video Willy introduced us to. I include the original story at the MCP and the picture provided by the editor, highlighting the various parts I comment on later.

LUDINGTON — Deputies from Mason County Sheriff’s Office get called to retail stores frequently for shoplifting complaints. The evening of Oct. 6 was no different. Sgt. Adam Lamb and his crew of deputies John Balowski and Kyle Boyd, were called to Wal-Mart for a complaint of a husband and wife who were caught by store security for stealing hunting supplies and children’s shoes. The couple was with their two young children.

“Deputy Balowski proceeded to interview the husband while Deputy Boyd and I spoke to the wife,” said Sgt. Lamb. “The children looked to be ages 2 and 4. We found out through speaking with them that they were having an extremely difficult time financially, which is why they stole the items. The husband had hoped to harvest a deer with the hunting supplies and to put shoes on his kids’ feet.

“I noticed the children didn’t have any shoes on and I asked the mother if the kids had shoes. She said yes and showed me two pair of very worn out shoes with holes in them.

“The kids were crying and the 4-year-old kept asking us not to arrest their daddy. It’s always a tough position to be in because when the law is broken we have to do our jobs. But, it’s tough for kids to see their daddy get arrested. We don’t want kids to have the impression that police are people who take their parents away.”

The father was charged with retail fraud third degree, a misdemeanor.

The three deputies talked about the incident and decided they needed to do something for the children. So, they pooled their money and bought shoes for the kids. They didn’t tell anyone. They just brought the shoes to the mother, who was tearfully grateful for the gift, Sgt. Lamb said.

“We weren’t looking for any recognition,” Lamb said. “Any one of the deputies on this department would do and has done the same thing.”

Their secret was safe until word got out and someone spoke to the sheriff.

“Adam, Kyle and John are examples of deputies we expect to serve the citizens of Mason County,” Sheriff Kim Cole said. “I hear these stories all the time, not from my deputies but from the public. These men didn’t do anything for any glory and didn’t even think it necessary to tell me about what they did. They love serving and ask nothing in return. They are similar to officers in uniform who daily protect and serve their citizens across the country.”

“We all have children whose ages are close proximity to the kids from this incident,” Deputy Balowski said. “It’s very likely that our children will go to school with these kids and that we, as parents, will be at school functions and other activities with these parents. I think it’s in our best interest as law enforcement to set an example for our children and for adults. Sure, we have to enforce the law and there has to be consequences for stealing. But, people fall under hard times and we are all neighbors here.”

The first clue is the picture of Deputy Balowski and Sergeant Lamb which heads up the article. The incident happened in October, and yet the photograph was taken very recently at Walmart with the kid's shoe department in the background. You can tell it's been taken in mid to late November because of the officer's beards created during 'No-shave November', another publicity stunt where the deputies sported beards to raise funds for the Boot (see related story).

So these in-uniform, on-duty officers who we are told by the sheriff have a great deal of modesty posed for the camera at the 'scene of the crime', and duly made their own observations to either Rob Alway of the MCP, or in a planned press release (see the blue highlights). All to show us they didn't want any public recognition for what happened. Walmart, in similar manner, humbly donated search and rescue flashlights to the MCSO (as related in the COLDNews and others), without wanting any public recognition for the fact.

Sure. If you really don't want any recognition for a random act of kindness, take a cue from Deputy Kyle Boyd, who didn't pose and didn't say anything about it. That's what modesty is, and if the other deputies were humble they would have done the same, and more than likely would be upset that Sheriff Cole decided to make a big deal of it.

We are told the three deputies pooled their money to buy the two young girls a pair of shoes each, which means they chipped in about $5 each since higher end Walmart baby and toddler shoes cost about $7 each. Five dollars is approximately what each deputy makes in wages every ten minutes.

What we are not told is that the court costs alone for the family will far overshadow the $15 the officers spent and the court may add onto that up to $500 more as punishment for the crime (see MCL 750.356d(4)). If our officers want to cover all that money lost to that family by purchasing necessities for the kids, then their efforts should be really commended.

Police are people that take parents away when the parents do something obviously unlawful like was done here. Their dad may, or may not, have had the right intentions, but the actions he did was wrong and this was a great opportunity to show these young girls that breaking the rules has consequences. Does anyone believe that the two kids will not be more averse to stealing after seeing what happened with daddy? However,...

Two different places say that both husband and wife stole the items. Why weren't both charged? If the law is to be enforced equally, why was she given a pass? Will the mother's two daughters grow up to think that the law applied only to their daddy and not their mommy? Will they think that the way to get new shoes for their kids is to steal from the big box store and get the police to buy them? Is this the best way to "set an example for our children and for adults" on how the system works? Neither are their kids likely to go to school with these kids since their parents live in Manistee.

This turned out to be the truly humanitarian act and something that these officers should be commended for. For if they had fully and reflexively applied the law here, they would have taken both parents into custody, and began the process to have the two children taken in, at least temporarily, by the cold arms of the state's child protection services. Where the two parents would have years ahead of them, at least, in convincing the system that they were fit parents once again, who would never again take them on a shoplifting spree.

And that would amount to the biggest crime, for I have researched both the mother's and father's online presences, and they seem to be otherwise proud and loving parents, who can hopefully recover from this setback, learn from their errors in judgment, and become responsible role models for their children.

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by stump on December 6, 2015 at 9:59am

Real talk, my comments probably stem from a experience I had. i was visiting at a friends house ,Everyone was outside and their small dog went into the street and was hit by a passing car. We ran out to the street , the little dog was thrashing around , the owner picked up the dog and brought it into the yard and set it down . Just then a police officer came by and stopped to see what was going on.He looked at the dog said something to the owner ,quickly pulled out his gun and shot the dog dead right in front of everybody, even the little kids which were about 6-7 years old. I can't imagine what they thought I know it affected me, still does. I have relatives that are in the police force from sheriff and state and friends in city, sheriff and state police. They all went into the job to be tough guys on a ego trip,not to just protect and serve the community. Ask one some time, it might change your view.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by XLFD on December 6, 2015 at 11:42am

And here's a story of a mom shot in front of her four year old kid-- the officer was attempting to shoot their dog at the time: Cop Shoots Innocent Mother to Death in Front of Her Child, Opens Fi...

The internet is filled with plenty of instances where innocent men, women and dogs get shot by police acting inappropriately, many on film. To deny they exist is folly, to work towards making it less prevalent and to make sure the improperly acting officers are held responsible, is a better exercise for all, including other police officers.