Wednesday, August 08, 2007

"A Credit to Our Profession"

Any effective whitewash requires a large amount of white paint—which the CALEA reaccreditation report for the Durham Police Department has provided in abundance.

A three-person team led by Chief Roy Liddicott, who oversees the force at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, produced a report that sometimes read as if written by the Durham Visitors’ Bureau. Portraying the DPD as an innocent victim of the lacrosse case, the accreditors concluded that the department “is a credit to our profession and a definite asset to the City of Durham.”

The report did note that the department “recently took some undue criticism for the Duke Lacrosse team rape investigation outcome.” [emphasis added] How, exactly, did the CALEA team reach this conclusion? Remarkably, Liddicott and his colleagues cited the Attorney General’s report, which laid out how the DPD had a role in obtaining charges for a crime that never occurred against three demonstrably innocent people. According to the CALEA staff, however, this report was “expected to validate the police department’s involvement and speak favorable [sic] of its actions.”

Steve Mitchell, the CALEA program manager for the Durham team, informed me that the accreditors did, in fact, read the Attorney General’s final report, despite the awkward wording of the clause quoted above. (Mitchell added that the CALEA accreditors did not read any of the depositions produced during the Nifong disciplinary hearing, even though those depositions were available before the report was made public.) Chief Liddicott did not respond to a request asking how he concluded that Cooper’s report validated the DPD’s performance.

Both CALEA and DPD representatives conceded that the department’s image had suffered some blows over the past 16 months. Who was to blame for this development? The media(!). (If only all reporters could be as gullible as Herald-Sun editor Bob Ashley . . . ) According to the report, the DPD “does everything it can to encourage good relations with the local media.”

As Liddicott, et al., explained,

The Durham Police Department also has a full time public relations manager (Ms. Kim Walker) who also assists with the media events from time to time. Ms. Walker was interviewed and she also mentioned the spotty relationship with the local media much of which she blames on the fall-out from the Duke Lacrosse Team rape case. The media is of the opinion that the agency has withheld information from them about this investigation, which is not accurate as they (Durham P.D.) are restricted from releasing certain information until the Attorney General releases its investigative report. Ms. Walker feels that when the agency is permitted to speak candidly about the case that its relationship with the media should improve drastically.

On April 27, the day after the AG’s office released its report, the N&O ran a highly critical—but also on-target—editorial about the DPD’s performance in the lacrosse case. The department’s response? Said spokesperson Kammie Michael, “The Police Department has no comment.” Apparently the DPD wasn’t too eager to “speak candidly about the case” after all.

What information was the DPD “restricted from releasing” before the AG’s report appeared? These items, alas, remain a mystery.

Other portions of the report seemed closer to fiction than a candid assessment of the police force everyone has seen in action over the past 17 months.

  • “There was significant improvement in file maintenance during this assessment. It is quite evident that the principles of accreditation have become an agency culture and how they do business.”

This, about a department that, in the highest-profile case in its history, featured a sergeant who claimed to have kept contemporaneous notes on a dry-eraser board that he didn’t realize was being erased.

  • “They are working hard to reestablish their standing in the community and are making great strides.”

This, about a department that, when given the opportunity to take a hard look at its performance in the case, instead produced the Baker/Chalmers report—which was so transparently a whitewash that it generated outraged reaction from every member but one of the City Council.

  • “Their property and evidence control function is one of the best this team has seen and should be held up as a model for other agencies.”

This, about a department that “accidentally” destroyed incident tapes that defense attorneys had requested be preserved.

  • “The agency is providing an exceptional level of service in all areas of law enforcement. They are staffed with totally professional individuals that are 100 percent committed to the mission of the agency and to doing their best for improving the quality of life for all residents of and visitors to Durham.”

This, about a department that admits to a “separate-but-equal” justice system in which some “visitors to Durham”—namely, Duke students—are punished differently for the same offenses than are full-time Durham residents.

  • “The Durham Police Department is very committed to the ideals and principles related to Bias Based Profiling and as such, train all its personnel on this topic. They provided their lesson plan and a sign in sheet in the files as additional proof. They teach this at their recruit academy as well as during annual in-service training for existing officers.”

This, about a department one of whose officers (Gottlieb) told a Duke student and U.S. citizen of Serbian heritage, “Do you need to speak to your consulate? We can deport you.”

  • “The Durham Police Department is committed to an ongoing and transparent relationship with the community.”

This, about a department whose acting public spokesperson, Cpl. David Addison, made repeated, false statements of fact to the community in March 2006, and then issued an inflammatory, guilt-presuming “Crimestoppers” announcement—actions that the department has refused to explain, despite repeated requests that it do so.

  • “The Durham Police Department produces several in depth and detailed organizational charts annually, or as needed. These charts clearly delineate lines of authority and responsibilities. Chief Chalmers spoke during the compliance panel reviews about the agency’s policy as it relates to the description of the organization and the corresponding organizational charts. All the functions within the department are described as to what they do, whom they report to and what their goals are. All unity of command issues were clearly articulated.”

This, about a department that ceded authority eight days into an investigation to the district attorney, an action that violated each of these “detailed organizational charts.”

That decision, however, appears not to have troubled the Liddicott accrediting team. The report blandly noted that “the Durham Police Department works closely with the prosecuting attorney and keeps victims informed of the status of their cases.”

When asked about Nifong’s ordering the police to produce a lineup that violated their own procedures—and the police following the order—Liddicott “explained how a police department anywhere has a relationship with its prosecuting attorney’s office and they work together.” The department’s using this rigged lineup, according to Liddicott, did not reflect “negatively on the agency’s ability to meet the standards of accreditation.”

How reassuring.

What did concern the accrediting team? Liddicott, et al., pointed out that “all officers are required to utilize seat belts while driving any police vehicle.”

They also rejoiced at how Durham, once known as the Bull City, “is now known as the ‘City of Medicine.’” They gushed that “CEO” Steven Chalmers had more than 30 years on the force, “with his true passion being Community Oriented Policing.” They reported that (unnamed) people from other local police forces called in to give such comments as, “I totally support their efforts”, “I recommend they be reaccredited”, “Top notch agency that works under difficult circumstances and does an outstanding job”, and “They have been through a lot and deserve a lot of praise.”


As virtually every defense attorney involved in the lacrosse case has noted, the DPD has many good officers--people who do their best under difficult conditions, uphold standard procedures, and attempt to treat all fairly. By asserting that the DPD is staffed by “totally professional individuals that are 100 percent committed to the mission of the agency,” Liddicott and his colleagues tarred all of the force’s good officers with the brush of Gottlieb, Addison, and (the perpetually absent) Chalmers.

“After the exit interview,” Liddicott wrote, “the team was driven to the Raleigh/Durham International Airport by Sgt. Shelton for our departing flights.” Liddicott didn’t say whether the team chatted with Shelton about how Linwood Wilson investigated him after the sergeant, despite peer pressure, held to his—correct—opinion that Crystal Mangum was a liar.

But we can be sure that Shelton was wearing his seat belt.


Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

Professor Johnson did you include among your questions, How they squared their conclusion the criticism of the DPD was unwarrented with the NC legislature thinking the behavior of the DPD in the lacrosse case meritted CHANGING THE LAW and encoding photo array policy into the law?

Anonymous said...

The real "Blue Wall lf Silence" in action.

Anonymous said...

Notice that one of the members of the full commission is a judge. One wonders what this judge would have done had this case landed in his court.

Gary Packwood said...

I am so stunned that I am going to wait for Debrah to comment.

I need help getting my words together.

Anonymous said...

GP 1:33

"No matter how cynical I get I just can't keep up."

Anonymous said...

I am exhausted by Durham.

Anonymous said...

Benjamin Himan's notes in the Duke Hoax case included the following:

"3/20/07 - Contacted Sgt. Shelton left message with the ACCREDITATION DEPARTMENT to contact me."

State Bar Hearing Evidence Binder, at p. 584 (emphasis added).

Himan apparently reached Sgt. Shelton through the Accreditation Department of the DPD. According to the DPD website:

"The Accreditation and General Orders Office works to maintain a liason between the department and the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA)...."

At the time that I read Himan's note, I was concerned that Sgt. Shelton - one of the good guys -

(a) Was working in the Accreditation Office back in March 2007;

(b) Was taken off the street where he had done immeasurable good;

(c) Was assigned to the accreditation position because of the "internal affairs" investigation by Linwood Wilson; and/or

(c) Was assigned to that position because of his honest actions in the Hoax.

Now, K.C. Johnson has shown that Sgt. Shelton apparently HAS been working in the accreditation department.

If the City of Durham took retaliatory action against Sgt. Shelton for telling the truth and not backing down, I hope he sues their pants off. The Whichard Commission MUST get to the bottom of that particular stinking mess.

"K.C. knows where the beef is. In Durham. Along with the baloney." (popular fast food commercial). MOO! Gregory

mac said...

I remember what Williamson said about some people continuing to look like fools; it appears now that he is prescient.

Considering how even the NAACP is finally getting the picture, perhaps this so-called "accreditation organization" will gain some notoriety and infamy.

Their complicity is like someone joining the Vichy Nazis right after D-Day.

mac said...

It just struck me: this is an affirmation of the dpd (now in small letters) in the manner of affirmative action.

Anyone remember Chalmer's report?
And did they look at the dpd's investigation of the prostitution ring, the dpd's false charges against their own (black) employees that they were sued for?

Affirmative action apparently means never having to say you're sorry.

Anonymous said...

Kinda gives you the warm and fuzzies, doesn't it? Nice to know the accreditation folks are that gullible. Move along, nothing to see here.

Anonymous said...

Litigation must be brought against the Durham Police Department. This is the only way that the criminal element of the department, including Gottlieb, Himan and Addison, will be brought to justice.

Enough with the WHITEWASH. The People demand the TRUTH.

Anonymous said...

Is Liddicott a Republican?

Is he a law and order man?

Does he think was the DPD does is to support and improve law and order?

Is this problem a national one or just a southern one? (Sorry about that, but he does hail from Florida, you know, until lately governed by Jeb Bush.)

Anonymous said...

Oh my. Great response KC. Cuts down to the bone of this charade. We see the obviously self-protective mechinisms working for the DPD. Beauracracy tends to support its bohemoth self no matter what.

The feminists not only control the academy, they have instituted laws that must be followed by our institutions. Rape shield laws, sexual harrassment laws, domestic violence laws, affirmative action hilarity, divorce court misandry etc etc. The feminists have become the status quo and we are in trouble.

For the clearest explanation of this mess have a look at the work of two academes from McGill who wrote Legalizing Misandry

Anonymous said...


Maybe they put Shelton in Accreditation because he's intelligent, competent and honest, and they thought he could help them get reaccreditted? Sadly, it worked.

Anonymous said...

2:29 "I am exhausted by Durham."

Three out-of-staters just gave the DPD a clean bill of health.

CALEA probably accredited your city's police department too. Doesn't that make you feel safe?

Anonymous said...

At one level, this is stunning, yet another level it is quite predictable. All across the country, police forces have become a law unto themselves, and the situation is getting worse.

We see where a wholesale episode of lying, lawbreaking, and attempting to frame innocent people now is seen as a highlight of "law enforcement." In other words, the very "accrediting" agency that has looked at the conduct of the DPD now officially endorses this kind of conduct.

Furthermore, we are seeing that no one associated in an official capacity with Duke University has shown a whit of conscience or cares about the truth. How fitting that Joe "It's Not About The Truth" Alleva had his contract renewed. I think that the Powers That Be in this country have spoken and it is this: America is a country where the truth no longer matters.

I am thankful for K.C. and others on these blogs who DO care about the truth and right and wrong, but it seems we are a shrinking remnant.

Anonymous said...

I see. This is all the fault of women. Feminist women. I don't think so, Kilgore.

History tells us that police bureaucracies have long histories of being corrupt. And violent.

My suspicion is that at least some who post here would not care about the DPD being either if its employees had not gone after rich, white male athletes. Lucky for the rest of the Duke students that this has gotten so much play.

And, before he asks: no, these cops aren't communist. They're probably not even socialists or liberals. They remind me of "In the Heat of the Night."

Anonymous said...

Contrary to rational, outside impressions, I believe Chief Liddicott was genuinely pleased that the Durham Police Department was not nearly as corrupt as his own. So pleased, he quite likely met behind closed hotel doors with his Durham counterpart to offer same a quick education on how to "improve" the DPD's performance in order to meet the high deceptive standards of the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood Police Department (et al).

Allow me to clue you in; inside any typical police department, you have exactly six months to get with the program, or else. During this period, you must agree to participate in crimes against the community, or resign.

It's not a "blue wall of silence," but a blue wall of lies.

And no matter how many times you see it unfold right before your eyes, you'll remain a doubting Christian. Kind to small pets and toddlers, and as dense as the good citizens of Durham.


Anonymous said...

Accreditations of this type are generally mid-level bureaucratic assessments, not tasked with assessing quality of work but rather are process oriented. As you know, in most government jobs, if you show up at 8, take only 30 minutes for lunch, and leave at 5, you have done a good day's work. Quality does not enter into the picture. I expect there is a check-off list and, of course, the visitors are shown only those things which shed the best light on the department. Dogs bark, cows moo, regulators regulate, and accreditors accreditate.

Anonymous said...

Is there as much violence against Duke students by Duke's police as by the DPD? Aren't campus police usually trained--like state police?--to deal with large-scale violence, like student riots? Or is this an urban legend?

My suspicion is that the good citizens of Durham have way more problems with their police force than just Gottlieb.

How did these police get chosen to evaluate the DPD? Is this accreditation done by/for a national organization, ie, is it one PD patting another on the back?

Michael said...

Basically it tells the average person that accreditation doesn't mean a hill of beans.

Anonymous said...

Very disturbing news about CALEA....they used to be known as a rather "by the book" professional accreditation group. Either this is a gross anomaly, or CALEA has been gulping the koolaid.

Anonymous said...

Is Liddicott a Communist?

Anonymous said...

Some years ago, a trend began where LE was put on the defensive over every niggling little thing. Cops were second-guessed about life-and-death decisions in street crime incidents, and it became obvious to many professional beat cops that no matter what they did, the public (read:MSM) would criticize them. Putting their lives on the line had never been an issue so long as they held the respect of the public. But working in hazardous conditions only to have piss-ant news columnists take cheap shots at them, good cops began taking a second look. That trend caused many good cops to leave the profession and the ranks were filled with what I consider to be wannabes. Too many cops today like the image of being the boss, having a sidearm strapped on and the cuffs at the back of their belts. They love to strut around like little bantam roosters and they enjoy pushing people around. That's my take after working with LE agencies for over 30 years. Where once we had dedicated patrol officers striving to "serve and protect," we now have uniformed people telling us what to do. I don't like it.

Anonymous said...

"Is Liddicott a Communist?"

No, he's an entrepreneur.

Anonymous said...

Quick question before I have to go: KC, have you contacted the librarian at Duke to learn whether your new book will be in the student library?

R.R. Hamilton

Anonymous said...

7:31 said: "I see. This is all the fault of women. Feminist women. I don't think so, Kilgore."

Someone is a bit defensive, eh? Who is blaming women? Not me. Men have their share of responsibility since their blind chivalry has enshrined the feminist misandry into law. No. I am holding feminists accountable for their misandry. Read the linked book and see if you don't agree. Footnotes and the appendix take up 250 pages. It's quite a book.

This is a typical defense of feminists. Rather than argue the point you claim the person is anti-woman. And so it goes.

Anonymous said...

Now I have to add Ft. Lauderdale to the list of cities to avoid. Police Department reviews should be done by responsible, objective and independent citizens (not a contrived politically correct group or by another police department) who are impacted by good or bad police work. Also, police departments should not have internal affairs divisions or investigations as they are meaningless and just add to the cost of maintaining a police department. Complaints should go to an outside citizens group for their review and report to the public with full sunshine and empowered with enough clout to make the police department pay attention. The review system that exists today is a joke and a complete waste of taxpayer dollars.

Anonymous said...

A number of years ago the Dept. I work for decided to become "accredited" by CALEA. This was seen by our Commissioner as a necessity to display our professionalism. I thought it was unecessary as I believed the rank and file were quite capable of displaying our professionalism through our every day work. Once accredited, which entailed changing some of our procedures to match "accepted" procedures mandated by CALEA, all of our cars were outfitted with CALEA badge so that the public would know we were now "professionals." I didn't like it then, and I hate it now. For CALEA to determine that Durham PD meets its requirements proves to me that their "accreditation" is worthless.

mac said...

7:31 am
Yeah, we've heard from you before.
You must only pop up from undcer the bridge once in awhile, or you'd have seen KC's post on the dpd's two incidents where they've had to make payouts to two separate parties where dpd misconduct occured - (in both cases, against people in the black community.)

The point:
Since black-on-black crime is more common than other kinds, it's still possible to consider the accreditation a form of affirmative action.
In both cases, the misconduct was against black folk.

Nice try.
Now go back to your cozy little spot under the bridge. (Say hi to the leprechauns, while you're there, Nan!)

"My favorite color! No,"

Anonymous said...

In fact, would this report be taken as an objective assessment of DPD performance in general, it would become a very damaging document for the investigators in charge the Duke Case:

Look at it this way: What could be the reason why a DPD operating normally under the highest standard of professionalism and integrity, ran a one sided investigation, ignored its own professional rules, understood nothing of what was said on the presence of male DNA during three meetings at DNA Security, etc. ? If you want to believe Roy Lidcott report this conduct is so remote from DPD standard that the blame must rest entirely on the two individuals in charge of the investigation.

Then what they did was not the result of years of bad practice, and lack of professionalism, but has to come from a deliberate effort to help a rogue prosecutor build a case against three inocent men.

If I were the lawyer of Gottlieb or Himan, I would not welcome this report.

Anonymous said...

This leads one to question what sort of police dept. doesn't receive accreditation . A quick visit to the website reveals liability avoidance is high on the agenda . The problem is where liability is avoided through concealment , slick promotional campaigns and a meaningless accreditation certificate . Some people finacially support their local fraternal order of police and in exchange receive a decal to place in the rear window of their car . The belief is that decal will dissuade some traffic cop from citing the driver for some violation . Perhaps accreditation works the same way . The department can point to the certificate when it is sued/ questioned for some civil rights violation .
At this point , civil liability is the approaching storm for Durham its police dept. , Nifong and others acting "under color of state law " . This might include the DNA lab. This is probably why the current commission will not be rigorous . Duke U. bought protection w/ the confidential settlements but in doing so gave the plaintiffs ( the innocent but wrongfullt prosecuted players) a "war chest". A well funded and well thought out civil case is approaching . It is similiar to the classic western "High Noon " . We just don't know when the train is scheduled to arrive.

paper sought from

mac said...

I think it's worthwhile for everyone reading this blog to contact their city officials to ask that they not use certain accreditation organizations, based upon the performance of this one.

Why waste taxpayer money and department resources, when it could be better put to use actually working toward real goals, like fighting crime and so forth?

Oh, I know: "fighting crime is so...passe. So old-school. Like justice, truth and the rest of that nonsense."

Anonymous said...

The CALEA report is a load of crap. Do they really think people are that stupid? Now if they said at the end of the report "The DPD is the exact opposite of what we cited in this report.... then that is believable. Corruption is one nasty bugger that won't go away because you cover it up. It is apparently inbedded so deep in Durham politics it will take some indepth digging to clean this festering wound once and for all.

Jack said...

At the risk of stereo typing, or sounding pejorative, and most unfortunately for the rest of us, in the minds of those in law enforcement, the world is divided into only two groups – Bad People, and other cops.

mac said...

With profound apologies to the real "Sheltered Workshops..."

The dpd seems more - from Chalmers' poor report - like an co-employer with Sheltered Workshops.

Again, my apologies to the real organization known as Sheltered Industries. They do fine work, especially with the challenges they bravely and honorably face.

It's not fine for the dpd to be modeled after them, though.

Chicago said...

If I still lived in Durham I would have to be thinking "You know, we're fucked" right about now.

Of course Durham does have some excellent police officers. Obviously, we came across none of them in this hatchet job of a frame.

Anonymous said...

plc @ 8:49 makes a good point.

In relevant part, my hunch is that the accreditation of the department would look at policies and procedures under which departmental personnel should operate. It would evaluate control, monitoring and reporting mechanisms to determine that, if rules/policies are followed then the operation and outcomes would be appropriate given the nature of the work.

It is highly unlikely, in my opinion, that the conduct of 1 or 2 police officers would be evaluated. Accreditation is not intended to be a disciplinary forum.

But, the report when viewed in the context of known abuses may very well demonstrate how "far off the reservation" Gottlieb and Himan were. It may be Exhibit A in piercing whatever immunity they have.

Now, this is all conjecture. I'd be interested in the policies governing the conduct of the accreditation exercise. That may shed light on the extent to which the report, in fact, discloses Gottlieb and Himan's vulnerability due to purposeful violation of DPD policies.

Anonymous said...

7:31 AM

Oh my, it all reminds you of "In the Heat of the Night," but then a stick in the mud reminds you of "In the Heat of the Night." I'm kinda hot right now myself. I had hoped for betta from the outside boys . . . er, girls . . . er, whatever.

Gary Packwood said...

This is Durham's version of George Bush's comment to the FEMA director during the clean-up in New Orleans following Katrina...

"Heckuva job, Brownie."

Lets all work together to help make government smaller.

Anonymous said...

Didn't the DNA lab just recently get reaccredited also? I guess next we will hear that CGM has just been reaccredited by HOAX (HOs Are X-cellent)

Anonymous said...

One of the biggest reasons the hoax was allowed to unfold as it did is the press and Professors in Duurham were content to let the police and DA's office do whatever the hell they wanted without consequence. Clearly this continues.

The saddest thing to me is that some "journalist" from the NO or HS isn't on this and showing the report for the sham it is. Let's face it, people in Durham know the DPD screwed this case up. Why does it take KC Johnson and not Bob Ashley, Samiha Khanna, Anne Blythe, or some other reporter to write about this?

Anonymous said...

The Accreditation group had to move on quickly,they are also the PR team for Hillary Clinton's campaign. You know,the senator who remained quiet while Colin Finnerty,a resident of her state,was being railroaded.

Anonymous said...

Metro is our police department and has great trust from the citizens. We are a law and order city. We want to keep it that way.

kcjohnson9 said...

To Inman:

In general, I think you're correct. The issue here, however, is that the report repeatedly (this was a 40-page report) went out of its way to assert or imply that there was nothing wrong with the DPD's performance in the lacrosse case.

That behavior is very strange in an accreditation report.

Anonymous said...

It may not seem likely, but it is conceivable that the entire department is honest except for Baker, Chalmers, Hodge, Lamb, Ripberger, Gottlieb, Himan, Clayton and Addison, and that the rest of the department was appalled by it all but couldn't do anything formally because it came from the top, and couldn't do anything informally because the press, both local and national, didn't want to hear anything that would ruin their great story.

Evidence to disprove this hypothesis will be welcomed.

Scary thought - what if the DPD got accredited because they're really not that unusually bad?

Anonymous said...

Shelton should have taken off his seat belt and delicately whupped Liddicott upside the head with it!

Anonymous said...


"In relevant part, my hunch is that the accreditation of the department would look at policies and procedures under which departmental personnel should operate."

But as with Dukes faculty code of conduct, a system of rules doesn't accomplish much if they're inconsistently or never enforced.

An ISO-9000 audit checks both whether you have a system in place and whther you're using it consistently. If this audit checks for the presence of a system but not its use then it's purest BS.

And if they concluded that the system was being followed properly in the DUke case then it's purest BS.

Oh well, I guess we have out answer. One of the problems with this is that CALEA's primary customer is police departments. If they get known for giving an "easy pass" that just makes their salesmen's jobs easier.

Anonymous said...

To KC Johnson,

Why is this strange in an accreditation report? Because it appears the report is responding to a particular issue? What usually happens?


Anonymous said...

7:12 [Kilgore],

If you're an academic, you must inhabit a different academic world than I do, because in mine, feminists do NOT control the academy. It's still mainly white guys. Silver backs as they're often known...

mac said...

Right. That's why Title IX has ruined so many mens swim teams, wrestling teams and other mens sports. Blame it on the "silverbacks!"
Yuk, yuk.

I'd like to propose affirmative action in sports, where each team's demographics represent the approximate ratio of race-gender for each college and university.

I bet Coach K could somehow find his voice if that were under discussion.

Somehow, though, none of this is germane to the discussion on this thread.

Anonymous said...

When will Gottlieb be fired for chrissakes?

Anonymous said...
CALEA Feedback

"Please tell us what you think about our web-site, the accreditation or recognition process or correction to data."

mac said...

Interesting title: "A Credit to Our Profession."
It's in the notes: that was the accreditation group's conclusion.

Now, let's take the "credit to our profession" and use it as it has been used historically:

"You are a credit to your race."

That hasn't exactly been seen as a compliment.

Perhaps CGM is also a "credit to her profession?"
The 88 are "a credit to their profession?" The Luv Nurse is a "credit to her profession?" Dr. Meehan is "a credit to his profession?" Mike Nifong is "a credit to his profession?"

I think that pretty much says it all.

Anonymous said...

For a good laugh - read what the super sleuths have written at LS about levicy's inactive status.

Anonymous said...

Probably police union connections.

mac said...

What's funny about it, Begas?
Snrlfledaskingmybrinnofuctionaryisitc - !

Anonymous said...

To Ralph Phelan who wrote: "Maybe they put Shelton in Accreditation because he's intelligent, competent and honest, and they thought he could help them get reaccreditted?"

That is why I wrote "IF the City of Durham took retaliatory action against Sgt. Shelton for telling the truth and not backing down." [emphasis added]

I do not want to rush to judgment, but I do want to note the suspicious circumstances. Also, a pretty recent Durham newspaper article hinted that there might be some future civil suits against the DPD for Hoax-based actions towards city employees.

After looking at the CALEA website, it appears that all they are interested in is whether the police department has the proper forms and policies in place. Whether the procedures and policies are implemented may be a different matter. It reminds me of the Seinfeld episode:

DUKE STUDENT: "I don't understand, there are DPD policies against evidence tampering, witness intimidation, taking notes and following the chain of command, right there, can't you read them?"

DURHAM PD: "Yes, we have those policies."

DUKE STUDENT: "You have those policies to protect our rights and freedoms!"

DURHAM PD: "I know why we have the policies."

DUKE STUDENT: "I don't think you do...."

"How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop? According to K.C., 4.3 billion and counting." Science in Commercials, by mac (SCIENCE, June 2007). MOO! Gregory

Anonymous said...

10:23 said: "If you're an academic, you must inhabit a different academic world than I do, because in mine, feminists do NOT control the academy. It's still mainly white guys. Silver backs as they're often known..."

You are so right. Just look at Brodhead. Old white guy. "silver back". Not a feminist right? LMAO!

Anonymous said...



Brodhead -- Silver Back ....oh come on, be a sport....

After all, Brodhead has displayed an almost primate-like capacity for human thought. Unlike the great ape's survival reasoning, however, is his inability to ascertain truth in the environment and an intellectual susceptability to the pheromones of the Apes of '88.

mac said...

I believe Brodhead would qualify as a "protohominid."

It would be interesting to see what he could do with a stick and a termite mound, assuming he didn't just use the stick to scratch himself with.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
7:12 [Kilgore],

If you're an academic, you must inhabit a different academic world than I do, because in mine, feminists do NOT control the academy. It's still mainly white guys. Silver backs as they're often known...

8/8/07 10:23 AM

Guys can be feminists and must be feminists or at least feminized to have any secure position in academia. Don't believe me? Ask Larry Summers.

mac said...

Notice how no one arises from the swamp under the bridge to defend the dee pee dee, unless they're

a)defending the "Luv" Nurse.
b)defending the honor (ha!) of the 88 or of racial/gender politics in general.

It appears that there is a tenuous relationship between these acadmics (ha!) and the dee-pee-dee.

Guess they've finally found a friend in CALEA! ("Motto: you have a friend in CALEA: repent, repent I say!")
Repentance wouldn't be a bad idea, actually.

kcjohnson9 said...


Yes. The accreditation happened to come up at this time--it wasn't caused by the lacrosse case.

Theoretically, the CALEA team could have followed the approach that Inman laid out--just described procedures, stress bureaucratic items.

This team, however, went out of its way to exonerate the DPD's handling of the lacrosse case--but appears to have done so based on wildly incomplete information. If the team wanted to get into the lacrosse issue, it had an obligation to do a good-faith effort to look at the DPD's performance.

Anonymous said...

10:50 am

CALEA Feedback

"Please tell us what you think about our web-site, the accreditation or recognition process or correction to data."'

Don't waste your time. Unless you're in a position to decide to hire them they don't care what you think.

On the other hand, there is a (very) small chance you might do some good by telling your municipal government that CALEA accreditation is a joke that they shouldn't waste taxpayer money on.

mac said...

Notice that one of their they're comments was about the dee pee dee's attempt to "re-establish their standing in the community."

Obviously, they know that something was broken; apparently, they just couldn't figure out which part was defective.

Would you be willing to allow these guys do your auto inspection?

gak said...

Unless there is a lawsuit by the players' families, I think we have seen about all the justice we will see. The Feds aren't going to step in and the coverup is in full swing. I've followed this one for a long time, but I think its time to stick a fork in it. It will be business as usual for the DPD now.


mac said...

If I were a member of the players' family (or one of their attorneys,) I might wait to see what the dee pee dee and the City of Durrhh was offering by way of defense - letting them put thier cards on the table, so to speak.

So far, they've only blown sunshine up their own behinds.

Anonymous said...

CALEA = Cash Accepted From Law Enforcement Agencies?

Anonymous said...


"My suspicion is that at least some who post here would not care about the DPD being either if its employees had not gone after rich, white male athletes. Lucky for the rest of the Duke students that this has gotten so much play."

The 'how convenient' innuendo 7:31 is not well taken. Considering how many made this a racial issue to begin with essentially puts yours and others' arguments right into the crapper.

Beyond your glaring hypocrisy why haven't you 'it's a racial thing' folks championed the cause of Laura Dickinson?

Let's see, that would be... politically INCONVENIENT!!!


Anonymous said...

GAK has it exactly right. It is only up to the families to pursue anything any farther. No person or entity will ever do so. Maybe wait until Whichway coverup is complete, but since that may never happen....?

Anonymous said...

Totally off topic, but KC did you have any problem with the storm/potential tornado that devestated parts of Bay Ridge? I live in the 90's and was fine, and had to drive in since the R was shut down and could not believe what I saw a mile away from 75th street to the Gowanus.

Anonymous said...

KC might find amusement in doing a profile on Reyn Bowman, head of the Durham Visitors Bureau.

This guy's a piece of work as he lives in his own little bell jar.

Durham is a wonderful place! The rest of the world just can't understand! Boo-hoo.....



Anonymous said...


Friday, July 27, 2007
Durham Image Improves

Conventional and anecdotal wisdom is that Durham's image took a hit during the past year because of association with the LAX debacle.

In North Carolina, it's true that, unique among cities, the news media and residents in other communities seem to blame Durham as a whole for the actions of individuals or groups.

Fortunately, that isn't the case nationwide. A new scientific poll by Opinion Research Corporation reveals that Durham's overall image stayed consistent with last June and polls done since 1995. And Durham's image as a place with many cultural, educational and entertainment features moved up to 14 to 1 positive to negative. As a place for new business and growth potential, it also improved to 10 to 1.

This took place as more and more people are familiar with Durham. The percentage answering they "don't know" about Durham has declined from just over half in 1995 to 25% now. As more people have become familiar, the percent negative about Durham has dropped now to 5% overall and only 3% for cultural/entertainment.
posted by Reyn @ 1:36 PM
Monday, July 23, 2007


Anonymous said...

Use of the word " unless" by 12:45 seems to suggest that initiation of a civil lawsuit is less than likely . I would be very surprised if a federal civil action is not pursued . The gist of such an action is that the defendant(s)acted under color of state law and violated a right secured by the US Constitution . Nifong and the DPD were obviously acting under color of authority granted to them by NC law . Nifong and persons w/ in the DPD acting in their official capacity violated rights regarding due process . The NC Bar proceedings have probably established these elements . The putative plaintiffs are probably awaiting the conclusion of the contempt proceeding and the commission investigation before filing the lawsuit .
There will probably be ancillary legal proceeding to determine, for example , liability insurance coverage . Typically , there is coverage for negligence ( carelessness) but not intentional conduct . This is probably why Nifong has maintained he didn't read reports , didn't check what documents were being disclosed and was generally stupid . He wants to avoid having a finding or admission that he acted intentionally .
This entire matter is far from finished .

Anonymous said...

CALEA was evidently formed to mitigate liability for damages resulting from misconduct. The following is a redacted copy of a treatise taken from the CALEA web site and I thought worthwhile reading / food for thought:

Accreditation programs, such as the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA®) Law Enforcement Accreditation program, can potentially reduce law enforcement civil liability by making it difficult for plaintiffs to sustain their claim. The rationale that underlies such a premise is straightforward: the voluntary application of professionally developed standards fosters the implementation of what the private sector would call “best practices.” The accreditation process contains a self-documenting system of accountability and independent verification. The principles of accreditation – professional standards, documentation, and accountability – can therefore supply the documentary evidence and persuasive authority necessary to demonstrate that the police did in fact act within the bounds of the lawful authority.

The positive effects of accreditation on insurance costs are well documented, and provide a useful quantitative foundation to the analysis of accreditation’s potential effect on civil liability. ...

While the studies certainly suggest a causal link between accreditation and liability reduction, they do not explain how certain aspects of the accreditation process may be used during the civil trial process. ... several lawsuits have been dismissed from the court system in part because of documentary evidence and testimony produced by the accreditation process. What follows in the next paragraphs is an analysis of how the principles of accreditation can be used to defend law enforcement officers and departments against claims brought pursuant to title 42 U.S.C. §1983.

Section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code is used by plaintiffs to allege a variety of constitutional torts such as excessive use of force or false arrest. Section 1983 was passed in 1871 and was originally called the “Klu Klux Klan Act.” [nota bene] It was intended to provide a mechanism for individuals to sue state officials in federal court for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws” of the United States. ...

Section 1983 became an effective tool for suing state officials in federal court in 1961, when the United States Supreme Court decided Monroe v. Pape 365 US 167 (1961). In Monroe the court articulated three reasons for the statute:

1. To override certain kinds of state laws.

2. To provide a remedy where the state’s law was inadequate to provide a remedy.

3. To provide a federal remedy where the state remedy, though adequate in theory, was not available in practice.

Monroe opened the door to the development of constitutional litigation as means of reforming state and local government practices. This type of litigation is also known as constitutional torts. ....

To establish a prima facie case under section 1983, a plaintiff must allege two elements: (1) that the state official was acting under the color of law and (2) that he or she was deprived of constitutional or statutory rights by that official. With respect to the first element, whether an official is acting under the color of state law, the rule is generally well settled. Any state action taken under the Fourteenth Amendment is action under the color of law for the purposes of section 1983 litigation. Thus, government employees act “under color of law when performing their duties, whether they act in compliance with state law, or contrary to it, or they exercise professional discretion. Cities and towns act under the color of law because they are governmental entities created by state law.

With respect to the second element, a plaintiff must allege a violation of a constitutional or statutory right. It is important to note that section 1983 does not confer substantive rights – it only allows one to bring suit for a deprivation of an established constitutional or statutory right. Thus, there are three basic types of claims:

1. Claims under the substantive component of the due process clause (i.e. marriage, family, procreation, and bodily intrusions or excessive force in non-seizure or non-prisoner cases)

2. Claims under the procedural component of the due process clause (i.e. life, liberty, or property).

3. Claims for the deprivation of specific rights denoted in the Bill of Rights, that fall under the Fourteenth Amendment through the principle of incorporation.

Once a plaintiff establishes their prima facie claim, what must the plaintiff prove to the jury? Section 1983 claims are very fact-specific and thus, what facts the plaintiff must prove in order to prevail differs for each type of claim. It is in this phase of the trial process where the principles of accreditation – professionally developed standards, documentation, and accountability – can help most.


Supervisors can be subjected to section 1983 liability for their subordinates’ actions if the supervisor’s acts or omissions are the proximate cause of the constitutional tort inflicted on plaintiff. Although the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the specific degree of fault that is necessary to trigger liability for a subordinate’s actions, there are nevertheless, three types of acts or omissions that could trigger liability: 1) the supervisor failed to take corrective action to remedy the unconstitutional action; 2) the supervisor either created or allowed to continue a custom, policy, or practice under which the unconstitutional action occurred; and 3) the supervisor was grossly negligent in supervising and managing the subordinates who caused the wrong. [Sound like Durham?] Therefore, where a supervisor knows that a subordinate has a propensity for misconduct, and the supervisor fails to properly supervise that subordinate, the supervisor could be held liable for the constitutional torts of the subordinate.

In Fiacco v. City of Rensselaer, the Court of Appeals held that a pattern of excessive force complaints which were not fully investigated was sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that the City had a “policy of non-supervision of its police officers” and a “deliberate indifference to their use of excessive force” despite the fact that procedures for investigating such complaints existed.


Supervisory liability ... will therefore, in large part, be decided on the evidence and testimony presented demonstrating supervisor’s actions. It is fact specific – what did the supervisor know? What did the supervisor do or fail to do? [bingo!!] Any documentation that can be introduced to show the jury that the defendant had no such practice [of allowing the District Attorney to conduct investigations, of hiding exculpatory evidence or lying to the District Attorney or others], or if he did, that defendant’s supervisor did not ignore it, might tend to counteract the plaintiff’s allegations. What kind of systems or procedures could generate such favorable documentation?

Documentation plays an important role in defending against any section 1983 claim. [I wonder that Gottlieb & Company are creating at this very moment. Perhaps, notes of their meeting of the gene pool members?] In Fiacco, the court was persuaded that the response to the excessive force complaints was “uninterested and superficial” in part because the evidence at trial indicated a lack of a documented investigative process. In response to the excessive force complaints, the evidence at trial showed that the defendant did not open investigative files, make notations, hold hearings, or take written statements from civilians or complainants [like Devon Sherwood and the various participants in the CMG gene pool]. ...

The three principles of accreditation – professional standards, documentation, and accountability – can help an agency to avoid a situation. ... There are several standards that require documentation of the type that could make the difference in court – supplying evidence that complaints were carefully investigated and proof that there is a system to identify potential employee misconduct. [hahahaha]


The department would have the necessary documentation to present as evidence – not only about the specifics of the claim but also that it had implemented the standard as general practice, which tends to build credibility with the jury.

CALEA Law Enforcement Accreditation standard 35.1.15 (4.6.9 in the Public Safety Training Academy Accreditation Program) recommends that departments adopt a personnel early warning system that requires a documented review of complaints and performance reviews to detect misconduct before it occurs. At least one recent news article underscored the importance of such a system and its potential for reducing civil rights liability, estimated to be in the millions of dollars. ...

The use of accreditation standards by courts and attorneys seeking persuasive authority is not without precedent. In Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court referenced CALEA Standards in determining what constitutes proper police policy when applying deadly force. In Grayson v. Peed, a federal district court cited an accreditation program as proof that sheriff’s deputies were adequately trained.

The CALEA web page has several testimonials from different departments citing the use of accreditation standards in defending against civil claims. Most notably, the Colorado Springs City Attorney’s office has utilized affidavits from an assessment team leader attesting to the Colorado Springs Police Department’s compliance with accreditation standards. The certificate of accreditation and department policies were even submitted as evidence.

In the above examples, the principles of accreditation – professional standards, documentation, and accountability – were used to supply persuasive authority and evidence to the court. Although there are no guarantees, when it comes to litigation, the principles of accreditation can tend to build credibility with the jury and counteract plaintiff’s allegations, ultimately protecting both officers and departments from civil liability.


Author: Richard P. Terbrusch is an attorney admitted to the state and federal bar in Connecticut.
(emphasis added)

One Spook said...

Two things come to mind:

(1) Follow the money.

Who pays for a police department to subscribe to this "accrediting agency"? No doubt it is taxpayer's (City) money. Does anyone believe for a moment that a police department, particularly one being criticized by "outsiders," would receive a poor report from any "commission" that it is funding?

The City of Durham stands a much better chance of getting a semi-accurate assessment of its conduct from the Whichard Commission and already any hope of accuracy or truth in that report appears doubtful.

2. Can anyone find a CALEA report on any police department that was highly negative?

Do you believe that CALEA wants to be like the Shakers who had 6,000 members in 1850, practiced CELIBACY, and now have 4 members remaining today?

Another indication that this report is total crap is the reference to " ... how they [the DPD] do business," and the reference to the Police Chief as a "CEO."

I've been in Business for over 30 years. The Government (including City Police Departments), Churches, Education, and the Military DO NOT do "business," and they don't have CEOs.

Business does business, and sometimes it isn't pretty; See: Enron.

And government, which is supposed to be transparent (NOT a requirement in BUSINESS), is supposed to be of, by, and for the PEOPLE.

The CALEA report is just another example of a particular association circling the wagons around one of its paying members, and it isn't worth the paper or bandwidth on which it appears.

One Spook

Anonymous said...

Sorry for the length of my prior post, but as it turns out, it was quite responsive to the immediately prior post by anonymous.

Anonymous said...

Wake up, Reyn.

Get hip to the situation!

Durham is not a destination.



Anonymous said...

One thing that I found to be particularly delicious about Section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code was originally called the “Klu Klux Klan Act.”

How special is that!!

Oh how the worm can turn.

One Spook said...

Inman @ 1:28 writes:
"CALEA was evidently formed to mitigate liability for damages resulting from misconduct. The following is a redacted copy of a treatise taken from the CALEA web site and I thought worthwhile reading / ..."

Well, there you have it ... CALEA is an "insurance" program providing CYA (Cover Your Ass) coverage in case a city is prone to being sued.

Good post, inman, but a link to that article would have been easier for the comment form.

One Spook

Anonymous said...

One Spook

Sorry that I was linkless. I'll try to be better in the future.


Anonymous said...

That is some fantastic work. It amazes me that we at Duke don't have the same caliber of professors.

Duke Students for an Ethical Duke

Anonymous said...

spook, I agree. That post should have been linked. Effs up the whole thread, imho.

Anonymous said...


-- form over substance.

Are long sentences and big words difficult for you?

Anonymous said...

One wonders if text messaging, cell calls, and teleconferences between the actors (DPD, City of Durham, Duke U) violates open meetings laws?

Anonymous said...

One Spook 1:28

"Do you believe that CALEA wants to be like the Shakers who had 6,000 members in 1850, practiced CELIBACY, and now have 4 members remaining today?"

Well, at least they lived to be 180 years old.

Anonymous said...

Too kinetic!

Too pathetic!

By John Stevenson : The Herald-Sun
Aug 7, 2007 : 10:58 pm ET

DURHAM -- A brawl erupted outside the Durham courthouse Tuesday, leaving eight people facing criminal charges and some gasping from law enforcement officers' pepper spray.


Anonymous said...

What was the brawl about?

Anonymous said...

I'm sitting here with tears running down my face right now from laughter.

Don't know why everything seems so hilarious at this moment. Could be the result of having a total of only about 4 hours sleep in the last two days.


However, I was thinking someone should replace all the copies of Reyn Bowman's little Durham booster books inside the bureau with print copies of D-I-W.



Anonymous said...

To 2:29PM--


Same old...same old, it appears:

"We had some people who were upset when they left my court," Morey added. "They all left at once. That always concerns me. Things can get out of hand quickly on the hot pavement."

At least five violent fights, three of them known to be gang-related, were reported at Durham's courthouse not long before armed deputies were placed at its entrances in 2004.

There were no serious injuries in those incidents, but many officials had visions of innocent bystanders being harmed or even killed.


Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

A Christian researcher?


Anonymous said...

I thought KC was more of a lion!

mac said...

2:37 is likely "the One Whom We Do Not Mention."

Anonymous said...

Debrah & Inman,

Some 88ist is just jerking your chains. You should ignore such obvious plants.

Anonymous said...

KC is a lion.


Anonymous said...

rrh, but that plant had such nice leaves, beautiful flower and a gorgeous stamen.

mac said...

And Debrah is Dorothy.
(But I thought KC was the Wizard?)

Anonymous said...

TO RRHamilton--

Perhaps.....or some other one we all know, but shall not speak "its" name.

To be sure, the Gritty Gang of 88 are frustrated mutts right now.



Anonymous said...

This report is a true white wash in the finest traditions of (circle the wagons we've been found out) law enforcement. Nothing will change and the Feds will not investigate. Garbage in, garbage out.

Anonymous said...

Can I be TOTO?

Anonymous said...


My use of the term "88ist" is not a reference specifically to the members of the Gang of 88, though I can certainly understand how my term can cause that confusion. When I say "88ist", I mean someone who supports the ideals (such as they are) represented by the original 88.

Due in part because of the confusion the term "88ist" causes, I think I will adopt the term I've seen used by many Duke students on the now-silenced messageboards of and call the 88ers and their ilk "diversity-racists". I urge that others also adopt this student-created term.

Anonymous said...

TO RRHamilton--

That's interesting shorthand.

Encompassing both the Gritty Gang and all their like-minded friends and janissaries.

I'm sure many will use it.


mac said...

I generally use 88-er, but 88ist sounds somehow better.

Anonymous said...

It's going to be so hot when Spook finishes KC's YouTube.....

......complete with photos/slides...with the whole Midnight Rider original cut from long ago.

Spook is quite creative.


Anonymous said...

Oh, "mac"....I have something funny to tell you.


Anonymous said...

Inman 1:28

"The positive effects of accreditation on insurance costs are well documented...."
If Durham gets slammed with megabuck judgements *after* getting such a glowing review from CALEA, insurers might start paying less atention to CALEA when setting rates, in which CALEA's products will become less valuable. I hope the market works in this case - it's for sure no ther corrective measures are working.

Anonymous said...

This letter was in the H-S yesterday. FYI, Mary Semans is one (Mary Duke Biddle Trent Semans)--cousin of the late and notorious Doris Duke......and responsible for the Duke Endowment in Charlotte.

Mrs. Semans must be around 80 years old and is one of the sweetest and most charming people you'll ever talk with. She and a few of her friends used to show up at the Washington Duke Inn for Thanksgiving lunch/dinner.

I used to make a reservation there almost every year for Thanksgiving because I don't really cook a lot.

Anyway, this same very sweet woman wrote letters-to-the-editor this past year in support of Brodhead which really tainted my view of her.

I think she is much like miriam cooke and her in a cocoon and talking in platitudes.

Mary Semans, no doubt, is a grand promoter of the diversity schtick at Duke....and it's easy to understand why, really.

People of her generation from great wealth often do feel guilty and responsible for the "minority" problems of the world. It's their way, IMO, of making them feel good about themselves. Whether such insane support of Brodhead and the Gang of 88 is secondary.

BTW, Mrs. Semans' daughter is married to a black man and it follows that her sensibilities would also be clouded by that tidbit.

Mrs. Semans, at her age, is much more interesting and intelligent than someone like miriam cooke; however, I could imagine the both of them having tea together while watching those goofy cooke videos yesterday.

All of this is to say that Richard Brodhead and his administration feel very solid about themselves with such strong support from people like Semans.

Semans is Duke.

Nice words for Lady Bird

Your editorial tribute to Lady Bird Johnson was very touching and beautifully worded. The environment and the elegance of untouched nature meant so much to her and she emphasized the beauty around us and the importance of treasuring and protecting it.

We must not forget that her caring for wild flowers and the beauty of our countryside inspired North Carolina's First Lady Jeanelle Moore, wife of Governor Dan K. Moore, who was determined to bring Lady Bird Johnson's ideas to her home state. She started the organization "Keep North Carolina Beautiful" and as a result we see a panoply of colorful plants and flowers beside the roads.

As we drive on our highways, we thank those remarkable ladies for preserving and enhancing North Carolina's wonderful display of flowers and greenery.

Mary Semans
August 7, 2007


Anonymous said...

You can bet that the insurers cover ing Nifong , DPD , and other likely defendants are poised to assert that the conduct of Nifong , Gottlieb etc was intentional - -and not the result of the dog ate my dry erase board ; I forgot to read the report - - so they do not have to write a big check . The insurers may file what is known as a declaratory action seeking a court determination on whether , for instance , Mr Nifong acted intentionally . This would lead to insurance lawyers taking a deposition under oath of Nifong and attempting to establish deliberate / intentional conduct . As a practical matter , most of the conduct to railroad the students was obviously intentional .
Nifong , Gottlieb and the other co-conspirators are looking at at least 2 depositions each .
As for the accreditation it is like the medieval church practice of selling indulgences or perhaps in todays world ,the sale of pollution credits.

Anonymous said...

As a person who is very familiar with the CALEA process and how it works, a couple of people have hit the nail on the head. It is a LIST of standards set forth by CALEA which the PD has to show they are in compliance with. They do that with the use of "proofs' which are kept on file at the police department.
The CALEA assessment team usually consists of three officers from departments similiar in size to the assessing agency. They ensure the standards are being followed by examining the file of "proofs" and by riding with officers on patrol and asking them questions about specific policies. They also examine specific areas in the PD such as evidence handling, criminal investigations, training, and community involvement.
There is also a public forum scheduled where citizens have the opportunity to comment on their police department.
In theory, the idea is good, but if the PD can show they're complying with the proofs, they are going to get a passing grade no matter how many cases they have bungled. They don't examine individual cases, just overrall compliance to specific procedures. and standards. This process occurrs every 3 years when the PD gets re-accreditted.
One other point, in reality, Internal Affairs Units are much more effective than Citizen Review Boards in overseeing police misconduct. They generally find more misconduct and are harder in disciplinary recommendations than Civilian Review Boards.
I have commented on this blog a couple of times before, but this fiasco is not about Addison, the investigators, or what Sgt Shelton did. This case is about NIFONG, a CHIEF OF POLICE and a COMMAND STAFF who let all this stuff happen.

Anonymous said...

Re: Mary Semans 4:19
I have decided "Debrah" is like the DIW Forest Gump. I have no idea who you are, but I suspect if anyone went back and looked at every photo of Durham movers-shakers-players, innocents and guilties, historic and current local "figgers.., " peripheral events, and media ops, you'd be in there. I picture a photo of Mary Semans in her finery in the dining rooom at the Washington Duke with her lady firends....and at the small round table in the rear corner sits a vaguely familiar....?

Anonymous said...

This reads as though it was written by a grade schooler and is so over the top in terms of cheerleading and baseless/false praise that it is an obvious joke.

Anonymous said...

TO 5:54PM--

I like that imagery....and sometimes wish I had been gifted with Forrest's understatement....but, alas... great gift to the world is turning egocentricity into an artform.

And you are quite accurate. You do not know me. I am not a resident of Durham and never have been.

I do move and shake alot, though.

ROTFLM-T-'s-O !!!


Anonymous said...

At least one judge is holding a rouge officer to a higher standard.

N&O Headline: Judge rules trooper violated woman's rights

A Wake County judge today threw out a drunken driving charge against a woman, ruling that a state trooper violated her constitutional rights when he pulled her over.

The ruling comes as the trooper has been accused of repeatedly targeting women in his patrols. It was not immediately clear, however, whether other cases would be affected.

Anonymous said...

5:30 Absolutly correct. Anything outside Nifong, Chief of Polie and Upper Command Structure is from the noise machine.

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't you know it, there was a piece in my local southern Maryland paper on 8 August about our sheriff's office being accredited by CALEA. I wrote the editor with the following:

"The accreditation of our Sheriff's office leaves a lot to be desired. The accrediting organization, CALEA, is the same entity that recently certified the Durham (South Carolina) Police Department even though there are ongoing, independent commission hearings related to potential criminal conduct by the DPD for their participation in the Nifonging of three Duke University lacrosse players with a false rape accusation. Rather than touting accreditation by CALEA, the honorable and heroic members of our Sheriff's department should be ashamed to be associated with them."

What timing for KC's post!