Today’s primary post discusses the transparent biases of some critics of the civil suit settlement. It also raises an obvious, if largely overlooked, point: it’s fanciful to believe that everything bad about the DPD’s performance has already come to light.
For instance, Cpl. David Addison has yet to be deposed. This is the same David Addison who, in his capacity as official spokesperson of the DPD, stated:
- “You are looking at one victim brutally raped. If that was someone else’s daughter, child, I don’t think 46 (tests) would be a large enough number to figure out exactly who did it.” (WRAL, March 24)
Addisonsaid police approached the lacrosse team with the five-page search warrant on March 16, but that all of the members refused to cooperate with the investigation.” (Herald-Sun, March 25)
- “We’re asking someone from the lacrosse team to step forward . . . We will be relentless in finding out who committed this crime.” (N&O, March 25)
Addisonsaid police can’t force samples from anyone they believe to be implicated in a crime. But he said that, in this situation, there was ‘really, really strong physical evidence.’” (Herald-Sun, March 25)
- “We’re not saying that all 46 were involved. But we do know that some of the players inside that house on that evening knew what transpired and we need them to come forward.” (ABC, March 26)
As we know now, all of those statements were either outright false or misleading.
Only two explanations exist for Addison’s actions: (1) in the highest-profile case in the city’s history, he allowed fellow officers to mislead him, causing him to mislead the public—calling into question his competence; or (2) he willfully misled the public—calling into question his ethics.
Under oath, what explanation would Addison provide?