Friday, August 15, 2008

Halcro's Challenge

Past behavior
Submitted by Tom Lamb (not verified) on Fri, 2008-08-15

Andrew, in 2001 he used DPS forms for the court and was of a personal nature. Who made the complaint? This was documented in his record. It would be interesting to know. He also was absent without leave... This was documented. Not sure who made the complaint. The other complaints that were identified other than the complaints you outlined that came from the Palin's have no source. It would be interesting to know who reported it. The issue with the possible drunk driving was a report done by a bar owner done through a phone call. The question is still out on if the trooper that pulled Wooten over and smelled alcohol on his breath acted appropriately. The negilgent damage to a state vehicle was documented but it is not clear who reported it. The other driving infractions that were traffic violations were documented but it is not clear who reported it. The open beer can was reported by a neighbor? But was discounted by the investigation but later was found credible. It would be interesting to know who reported the other documented misconduct that required some sort of action.

Andrew's Response : I've seen his file and went through it before I wrote the original story and there were no complaints that I saw from anyone not connected with the Palin family that would give credibility to this rogue, out of control cop theory being used as a red herring. Ironically, the recent discovery of this tape featuring Frank Bailey has more than likely given Wooten grounds for legal claims against the state.

Via Andrew's blog, I sent the above comments ..........................................

My response to Andrew's response but he never posted it:

Andrew In the March 1, 2006 summary it was stated that the violations that the Palin's brought were:

using a taser
shooting the moose
and the drinking of the beer before and during the operation of a vehicle

However, included in the summary it is mentioned that a review of the personnel file and the following actions were taken:

12-27-01 Warning for filing personal documnets written on DPS report forms with the Court in reference to a personal issue.

1-5-04 Reprimand for negligent damage to a state wehicle.

1-24-05 Instruction in reference to driving complaints of speeding, unsafe lane changes, following too closely, and not using turn signals while operating a state vehicle

4-14-05 Instruction for being absent without leave

6-24-05 Instruction for reimbursement for prersonal cell phone calls

10-12-05 Suspension for violation of traffic law

11-16-05 Memorandum of Expectations to clarify duty hours, tardiness and
personal business during duty time.

The later actions taken seem to be not a result from the Palins but others.
The tardiness and the damage to the vehicle and the absent without levae would
be reported by someone else.

It would be interesting to see who made the complaints.

And you are correct litigation could conceivably take place.

No comments: