More Kudos to Light
Brant Light is going to prosecute the mother of a recent escapee. Good for him. I don't care if it is your kid, lady, he's a dangerous felon and more likely than not would have hurt someone had he not been caught. Good job, Mr. Light!
This lady won't, but should, do jail time.
By the way, the story adds a new detail to the escape story. The guy was wearing black boxer shorts so, once he was free of the van, he was able to credibly pose as a jogger. As a friend pointed out, this is easily cured. Nothing but tighty whiteys or commando from here on out, right Sheriff?
Finally, I am still waiting to hear about the discipline meted out to the deputy or deputies whose screw-up caused this whole mess.
7 comments:
This thing still does not add up. I have always understood that inmates at out county correctional facility are REQUIRED to wear pink underwear for just this reason.
Why was this guy wearing black shorts in the first place? That would seem to flout already standing procedure.
Am I the only one smelling a problem here?
No, you're not. And it also smells like the whole thing might be brushed under the rug, too.
I can think of two races this year where this could become an issue; there will be contested races this year for both county commissioner and sherrif.
Between the lawsuits and this, Castle is done.
I am not willing to go that far ... yet.
If there was malfeasance here (which is a pretty good bet, I think), there is no proof that it goes as far up as the Sherriff's office. I am willing to reserve judgement while what I hope is a comprehensive internal investigation takes place.
Call me naive, but I still hope and expect that is what is taking place in the Sherriff's office. If not, heads up to and including the Sherriff and the County Commission have to roll.
No offense, TSJ, but I think you mean misfeasance. Malfeasance implies guilty scienter, or intent. I am not willing to go that far.
No Geeguy, the word malfeasance was intentional. I hope that I am wrong, but lets review;
a) The guy had the keys to his shackles;
b) He was not searched prior to transport;
c) He had a key;
d) He was wearing black underwear;
e) He had a key;
f) The discovery of his absence took place over an hour, and about a hundred miles, from his actual escape;
g) Did I mention that he had a key?
No, this screams inside job; or at least looking the other way.
Like I said, I hope that I am wrong.
Post a Comment