Whipped Cream Difficulties

I wish I could explain why the Otto Zehm story makes me so angry. After all, The Agitator is on my blog roll; surely I get my fill of police abuse stories from there? Why is this one different from all the other ones?

I don’t know. Maybe what makes me so angry isn’t just that a police officer beat a defenseless unarmed man to death and tried to lie about it, but that his superiors – from the chief of police and the mayor on down – tried to cover for him, and are still in denial that he actually did anything wrong.

But surely there are other things going on in Spokane, Washington, right?

Yes. Yes, there are.

A jury on Friday awarded more than $700,000 to a Spokane police detective they say was wrongly fired and retaliated against by Chief Anne Kirkpatrick.

The gentleman in question, Detective Jay Mehring, was arrested in March of 2007 on charges that he’d threatened to kill his wife (apparently, they were divorcing, and the split was not friendly). At that time, he was placed in “unpaid layoff” status. That’s fair, right? You don’t want someone facing criminal charges working as a police officer.

Detective Mehring went to trial in October of 2008, and was acquitted of the charge. The Spokane city attorney recommended at that time that Detective Mehring be reinstated and given back pay.

He’s since been reinstated but is on paid administrative leave in what his lawyer, Bob Dunn, told jurors was retaliation for his lawsuit.

Here’s an additional tidbit for you:

Before deliberations began, [Judge Kathleen] O’Connor issued a partial verdict in Mehring’s favor, ruling that the City of Spokane committed a violation when it laid Mehring off pending the resolution of his felony charge. Jurors then ruled that the city violated Mehring’s rights to due process, and that the city of Spokane and Kirkpatrick intentionally or recklessly inflicted distress.

But here’s what really set me off:

Marlene Feist, spokeswoman for the City of Spokane, said the verdict likely will be appealed.

She said Kirkpatrick “is trying to hold her officers to high standards, so we’re supporting her in that effort.”

High standards? High standards?! Let me remind you what Chief Kirkpatrick said:

“Based on all the information and evidence I have reviewed, I have determined that Officer Karl Thompson acted consistent with the law.”

And this was after the release of the security video that contradicted Thompson’s story. Chief Kirkpatrick knew Thompson was a liar, and knew the Feds were investigating. But she continued to support Thompson, because beating an unarmed man to death apparently doesn’t violate her “high standards”.

This entry was posted on Friday, November 4th, 2011 at 7:41 pm and is filed under Clippings, Cops, Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.