Another Side of Cole 'sLaw

[XLFD]

In the first segment of this look at an incident four years back which shown a side of Sheriff candidate Kim Cole that has rarely been seen, we had the court documents that a Martin Schilling filed alleging 3-5 violations of the Fourth Amendment by Sergeant Cole on February 25, 2008   Cole 'sLaw

                Cole 'sLaw Lovers: Former MCS Englebrecht, Hartrum, Stewart, and Sgt. Cole 

With a subsequent FOIA to the Mason County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) we have gotten back the other side of this case:  the police reports, interviews with Martin (and Kyle) Schilling, and a variety of other records.  Let's start with the police report filed by Kim Cole as to his version of what happened that early morning, then early afternoon.

Many may look at the first stop, and say that Sgt. Cole did not do anything wrong.  That is in itself incorrect, as he used his powers as a police officer to stop Martin Schilling going about in his car, without having any probable cause to do so.  Sgt. Cole says:  "I then stopped his vehicle on Campbell Rd....", he then asks Martin where his son was and many other questions/comments about what was going on with his son-- but never told Martin the reason why he stopped him, which seems to have been just to interrogate him.  Martin Schilling was well within his rights to just answer every question with "Am I free to go?" "I'm going to remain silent."  By Sgt. Cole's own narrative, he stopped the vehicle without reasonable suspicion that Martin had, or was going to, commit a crime, or that he had violated any traffic law.

But police officers are entitled to one mulligan occasionally; unfortunately, the second encounter was even more violative of Martin's rights.  The bottom of the above explains that Sgt. Cole once again stopped Martin's vehicle via a traffic stop.  Using that terminology gets him in some trouble, for once again, Martin had made no violation of traffic laws; if Sgt. Cole had said he stopped the vehicle because he thought a fugitive was inside, that would be likely seen as a legit cause in court.  Page 2:

This is where Kim Cole's actions go beyond the pale.  Martin is stopped and told to show Kim his hands.  He complies.  He is told to put his hands on the 'hood' of the vehicle.  He complies, correcting the officer's verbal flub.  Martin has done nothing against the law, nor is there cause that he may.  Cole's narrative:   "He looked at me and with an arrogant tone stated "that's not a hood, it's a roof.  I then secured him by handcuffing him, hands behind his back, with the cuffs double locked and contacted the detective bureau.  I was told to bring him in for an interview."

If you are OK with police tactics like this, then vote for Cole.  If you are appalled at a man being stopped twice unlawfully, then humiliated by getting handcuffed and taken in for questioning for no reason-- if you, like Sheriff Fiers, cannot defend these police actions-- then I suggest you work hard to stop Cole from getting elected to a position where he will endorse his officers doing such actions.

For he has never publicly acknowledged that he has done anything wrong; quite the opposite, in this letter from his old boss Laud Hartrum, his actions were... "lauded".

Kim Cole indicated that he would be filing suit against Martin Schilling???  For what, correcting his car part gaffe?  Is this the type of temperament we want as Sheriff of Mason County?

Here's another thing that bothers me in this case.  This document here says that Kyle Schilling was arrested at 1300 on Feb. 25., and yet This record  says they didn't start interviewing Martin until 1330, a half hour after Kyle was in custody.  They don't apprise Martin of that fact.   Detective Kenney then has a long talk with Martin, 41 pages of transcribed interview, here's page one , page seventeen where they discuss the first stop, with Det. Kenney saying it's a lot safer environment on a traffic stop than it is coming to your house (?!), page thirty-four where Martin asks whether he will be cuffed again when he's taken back to his vehicle, and Kenney joking 'not unless you want to be'.  I think I would not have found that very funny at that point.

Lastly, I think this truly shows how bad the Mason County Sheriff's Office was back in 2008  under Laud Hartrum.  Supplementing his October letter above, this warrant request shows they tried to get Martin Schilling arrested for Harboring/Concealing a fugitive for his actions on 2-25-2008.

Note the date is loosely penned in "Tot Pros 4-16-08" making one think they got it to the Prosecutor on April 16.  But the reply by the Prosecutor Susan Kasley Sniegowski is dated 7-1-2008 and has the MCSO 'received' date of 7-2-2008.  Telling why  MCL 750.199(3)(a&b) does not apply:

The media releases by the MCSO at the time of the settlement said:  " He was released about an hour and a half later. Law enforcement officers requested a warrant for Schilling to be charged with a crime not specified in the filing. The Mason County Prosecutor’s Office denied that request."   One would think the warrant was requested and denied while they had retained Martin Schilling, reading this.  Over four months later that request was denied.  Four months after the fact.

What precipitated that warrant being issued?  Maybe it was Martin's filling of a lawsuit in May of 2008 (in that four month period) about false arrest and illegal search and seizure.

It has one ask the questions.  Why did the MCSO not request a warrant, put it before the Prosecutor, until after they were served with a lawsuit that declares there were unlawful detainments, seizures, and arrests?  How could the MCSO justify the Harboring a fugitive charge in the above manner when there was no such harboring or concealment?  And how, in October, can both Sheriff Hartrum, and Sergeant Cole trumpet that Cole will sue a man that did nothing wrong other than stand up for his rights and sue the County a half year previous?

And Sergeant Cole, how's that countersuit working out for you?  I only see here a Sheriff's Office drowning in its own corruption, and lacking any sort of consideration for the rights of a Mason County Citizen, innocent of doing anything wrong in this situation involving his son.  If you want the MCSO to operate this way, then by all means vote for Kim Cole.  If you want someone who actually respects the Constitution, never defended the MCSO's actions in this sordid affair, and considers himself a servant to the public (not vice versa), then vote for Jeff Fiers. 

[XLFD]

This reminds me of Fermat's Last Theorem.   This theorem was first conjectured by Pierre de Fermat in 1637, famously in the margin of a copy of Arithmetica where he claimed he had a proof that was too large to fit in the margin. No successful proof was published until 1995 despite the efforts of countless mathematicians during the 358 intervening years.  It states that that no three positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation aⁿ + bⁿ = cⁿ for any exponential  integer value of n greater than two. 

My "followers" should not take my word for anything without proof, but if you want to pass me something in confidence, I will gladly look it over, keep the 'names and things' in confidence, and pass along my impression of it to the public at large.  Send me a private message.

[XLFD]

Agreed.  But I'm still worried about that gulag...

Congratulations , Kim Cole, our new sheriff-elect.  But it's still going to be interesting for the rest of the year at the MCSO.

[Sweater Cows!]

Yep, gratz ol' boy! One thing----At least we have no outsider and have a local.

That should be an interesting year alright! Almost wrote myself in but didn't figure the paper would print my one vote anyway, few more years and maybe I'll go up against Posma for our district.