« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Danger Creation; Trooper; Palins; Affirmative Action by State...another follow up to great arg by Seashell
Seashell et al:
Whether there was an affirmative state action to increase danger to a person per section 1983 depends on all the facts, which we don't have, because the investigation's not done.
That said, with the allegation that the governor's family was threatened by a state trooper in the context of an ugly divorce, there ought to at least have been an internal inquiry. If it came down to a he-said-she-said deal, we know why the commissioner didn't fire Wooten. We don't know if the commissioner did anything else, i.e. time off, anger mgt., counseling or whatever; or if there were notes collected to give him more to go on in that process.
It would have been an affirmative action by the commissioner to have investigated, but negligently investigated the trooper. Not that this happened, but if so, and credible witnesses say Wooten threatened the Palins, clearing the fellow could be the affirmative act to increase the danger to the threatened parties since no further intervention can be had if an negligent investigation clears a troubled officer.
Another issue would be trends. Were other officers covered for scary domestic behaviors? LAPD has had cases of officers threatening / killing estranged spouses and their paramours. Some have alleged that the danger signs were negligently or fraudulently investigated as a favor to the blue brothers.
OTOH, Wooten may be good as gold and may have endured much injustice. That ought to come out in the wash too.
As has been my mantra about these things, without a full, unbiased outside agency investigative result on the quality of any commissioner inquiry and surrounding circumstances, we just don't know. To call it a "scandal" without that information is "prejudicial." And because this is a pro-Dem website and she's a GOP'er, some folks too easily line up behind the prejudice.
Post a Comment