Ellington

WLBT reported Friday night that the mayor and police chief have fired another 20 or so police officers, but will say what they did to deserve, or even how many were fired:

No one WLBT talked to Friday could give us the exact number of officers that have been fired, but the mayor estimates the number to be around twenty. He says many of these cases sat idle in Internal Affairs for as long as two years before any action was taken. The mayor says many of the firings involve civil rights violations. Mayor Melton had to personally sign off on all of these firings, and he says actions like these help make the Jackson Police Department a better place to work. [...]

Chief Shirelene Anderson (sic) wouldn't go into detail about the firings, saying they were personnel matters. Mayor Melton says these firings prove to the public nothing will be swept under the rug.

Wait, I'm confused. How is it that "nothing will be swept under the rug." *Everything* is under the rug here.

And what is our total number of officers down to now? Hasn't the mayor said he would not hire more officers until he can raise their pay in his budget where he is cutting taxes by a million dollars. Or whatever. Confusion abounds.

Previous Comments

ID

120780

Comment

Am I correct in my math here that this means Melton has fired about 50 police officers to date, with no explanation? Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-07T18:33:22-06:00

ID

120781

Comment

On WAPT last night, Melton said they were fired for numerous reasons, including rape. There's no link for this story on the Web site, so I hope someone who saw it can confirm what I am saying.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2006-01-07T19:49:01-06:00

ID

120782

Comment

As angry as I get about police officers who are guilty of rape or sexual assault, due process exists for a reason. The proper procedure for an officer who has been accused of rape is to suspend the officer until an internal investigation has been completed. To fire an officer outright, based on accusations that have not been formally substantiated, does not sound kosher to me. It sounds like one more thing that could potentially lead to a lawsuit against the city, particularly if the accuser later recants or the officer is otherwise exonerated. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-07T19:57:19-06:00

ID

120783

Comment

I reread the article. Corrections to my earlier points: - Melton does not really have the authority to fire officers at will, but the chief does. As long as she was doing it based on her own judgment, I have no complaints about that. - The community policing folks were not, I gather, technically police officers, so the total is closer to 20 than 50. - I do have concerns about Melton accusing one or more of the 20 officers of rape without having proved it in a court of law, because he has put himself in a moral catch-22. If he says which officer, and the charges are not proven in court, then he may expose the city to lawsuits for both slander and wrongful termination. If he refuses to say which officer, and only one of the 20 is guilty of rape, then he has smeared the other 19. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-07T20:09:37-06:00

ID

120784

Comment

You make a good point, Tom. Do we have a rapist running free in our community who is going to remain unidentified? I'm beginning to learn that there is a historical approach in this city to dealing with rape that does not always mean actually prosecuting someone for it. This concerns me. And, frankly, at this point, how we can believe what he says? He's told us doubtful stories, so far, about men having public sex in the adult bookstores he's targeted -- but without backing it up, or showing any arrests. Also, should we be taking the messages that Mr. Melton does not actually condone arrests for sexual misconduct, just firing them and getting out and site and out of mind. That makes me feel safer as a citizen. There are so many levels of irresponsibility here that it's not even funny. This is a mass firing. The chief should be holding a press conference and telling us what these officers did to deserve it. Otherwise, they are simply sowing distrust of them. And she looks like she can't do a thing on her own without Melton telling her what to do. If that's not true, she ought to work on the public "perception" of her. By the way, does anyone have knowledge about where she lives? Has she established her residency here yet? House? Apartment?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T10:43:11-06:00

ID

120785

Comment

I thought she lived in Belhaven? Didn't you touch on that back during the election or was that another candidate he was thinking of choosing? However, again it appears to be some knee-jerk decision. I look forward to more on the story. Obviously, the Clarion Liar didn't find it worth reporting on in depth for Sunday. They are so lame!

Author

pikersam

Date

2006-01-08T11:00:52-06:00

ID

120786

Comment

I do not think she lives in Belhaven. From what I understand, she has not gotten her own place, yet, but I don't know for sure. And they are steadfastly refusing to give us her *resume*. We are on our third public-record request for it, I believe. When Chief Moore was hired, they sent a virtual manuscript of materials on them. Why in the world is her damn resume such a big secret? The time the city's lawyers are spending trying to keep public information from the public must be costing us a pretty penny by now. Anyone else know where the chief lives?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T14:38:01-06:00

ID

120787

Comment

I certainly would be interested in knowing her qualifications as chief. Also doesn’t the City Council approve the hiring of a new chief?

Author

K RHODES

Date

2006-01-08T18:27:21-06:00

ID

120788

Comment

Council tells us that they were never given her resume. Now in how in God's green acre one could vote to approve a police chief without seeing their resume is beyond me. (Councilman Allen?) But it does seem that, to date, everyone has a different standard for Mr. Melton. Why don't you publicly request her resume, K, as a citizen?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T18:31:56-06:00

ID

120789

Comment

“Why don't you publicly request her resume, K, as a citizen?” Great suggestion!

Author

K RHODES

Date

2006-01-08T18:50:49-06:00

ID

120790

Comment

Great. Keep us posted on what they tell you. I'd suggest that others do the same.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T18:52:44-06:00

ID

120791

Comment

Donna writes: You make a good point, Tom. Do we have a rapist running free in our community who is going to remain unidentified? I'm beginning to learn that there is a historical approach in this city to dealing with rape that does not always mean actually prosecuting someone for it. This concerns me. The number one reason for this, based on what I've heard anecdotally, is that--because of the poverty rate--victims tend to be more vulnerable than in other parts of the country, and more suspicious of police. And the suspicion is well-founded: Officials routinely leak information on rape reports in such a way as to make it available to the perpetrator. And if the perpetrator is a cop, all bets are off--the thin blue line becomes a very real problem in cases like this. The one thing I'd say in defense of Melton is that if he fires the police officer, that makes the process of pressing charges easier for the plaintiff. Not easy, but easier. State rankings routinely place Mississippi at the very bottom in terms of places for women to live. This is one of the reasons why. We do have a very robust rape shield law, but there are other legislative options that could also be pursued. I have once again been told, recently, on good authority that the state laws pertaining to rape only deal with one orifice--all other kinds of rape being classified under the much less serious heading of sexual assault, which has far lighter prison terms. All of the cases of police rape I've ever seen covered in the media involve other orifices, probably in part for this reason, so unless I've been given bad information (in which case I need the actual state code citation on a rape law that includes non-vaginal rape), the laws need to change on this point. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. The secret to changing the status quo on rape in this state is to put laws in effect that better protect the confidentiality of the accuser, and throw the book at anyone who violates that confidentiality. I think that anyone who leaks information on a rape accusation and the accuser's current whereabouts to an accused offender with a documented past history of violence should get at least 20 years in prison, even if the accused offender does not act on that information. And, as in the case of Jackson crime, we need to solve the perception problem. When I bring up the above paragraph, people are quick to defend law enforcement by saying the information is seldom leaked. Fine. Publicize that fact in such a way as to make women feel safer when they press charges against rapists. Because until that happens, nothing is going to change. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-08T19:38:04-06:00

ID

120792

Comment

And from what I've seen, too many people in power here do not take rape seriously. When the scandal broke at the Juvenile Detention Center in the early 1990s, District Attorney Ed Peters actually told the media that he wouldn't bring felony charges against the accused guards for sexually assaulting 15-year-olds in their charge because the young women "consented." Really, it's in the Ledge's archives.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T19:41:41-06:00

ID

120793

Comment

Donna, we did get a resume....a long time ago...when we talked, I thought you meant "did I have one?". I will check and see what i can find...it has been 6 months. Sorry for the confusion.

Author

Ben Allen

Date

2006-01-08T19:59:08-06:00

ID

120794

Comment

Oh good. Thanks for clearing it up. Fax it on over, please, along with any supporting materials you have. It seems to me that this is a big "duh" when it comes to the public's right to know who their new police chief is.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T20:07:41-06:00

ID

120795

Comment

Okay, here's the citation from the Mississippi Code, section 97-3-65, subsections 4 and 6. My reliable source--who said that non-vaginal rape was not classified as rape under state law--was right, and whoever informed me otherwise was wrong. This law needs to be changed. Text here: (4) (a) Every person who shall have forcible sexual intercourse with any person, or who shall have sexual intercourse not constituting forcible sexual intercourse or statutory rape with any person without that person's consent by administering to such person any substance or liquid which shall produce such stupor or such imbecility of mind or weakness of body as to prevent effectual resistance, upon conviction, shall be imprisoned for life in the State Penitentiary if the jury by its verdict so prescribes; and in cases where the jury fails to fix the penalty at life imprisonment, the court shall fix the penalty at imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for any term as the court, in its discretion, may determine. (b) This subsection (4) shall apply whether the perpetrator is married to the victim or not. [ ... ] (6) For the purposes of this section, "sexual intercourse" shall mean a joining of the sexual organs of a male and female human being in which the penis of the male is inserted into the vagina of the female. Unfrigginbelievable. And I understand that it's only been within the past ten years or so that subsection 4b--covering rape by a spouse--was added to the code. I guess we should take comfort in the fact that at least some progress is being made, but more needs to be done. The web page for the Mississippi Coalition Against Sexual Assault looks promising, but it's loading very slowly on my machine. Might be a server issue. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-08T20:08:06-06:00

ID

120796

Comment

GOOD GRIEF. Even if they "consented," it would still be statutory rape. And any jury that would believe that anything a 15-year-old prisoner did with an armed adult guard could be considered "consensual" should be recused from future service on the grounds of mental incompetency. Now, I can understand why charges might not have been pursued if there was a lack of evidence. But if the guards already admitted having sex with the kids, they just confessed to stat rape and should have been on their way to the paddy wagon for that, at the very least. And people say The Handmaid's Tale is fiction. Pay close attention to this stuff, folks--this is not "incompetence." This is not "mishandling. " This is part of a larger, anti-woman political agenda. And until it is recognized as such, it's going to be very hard to fight. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-08T20:15:07-06:00

ID

120797

Comment

Not in Mr. Peters' head, apparently. And it had to get to a jury first, which he was doing everything to block. He wouldn't send the case to a grand jury.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T20:18:23-06:00

ID

120798

Comment

Gosh, what a guy. And I'm guessing the statute of limitations is long past, so he can declare mission accomplished if he wants. At least we've got Faye Peterson now. Hope we can keep her. When's she up for reelection...? 2007? I might help stuff envelopes. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-08T20:31:56-06:00

ID

120799

Comment

Speaking of Ms. Peterson ... after all the reading I've been doing on the last 30 years in Jackson, it is downright remarkable to hear people complain about *this* district attorney. It almost makes me suspicious that the people the loudest against Ms. Peterson want us to return to a ... well ... more interesting time when the district attorney's office was uber-powerful, meaning that if you were a friend, you were set in various ways. (Ask Mr. Bluntson, for instance). But if not ... Let's see, she was re-elected in 2003, same year as Barbour, right?

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-08T20:36:41-06:00

ID

120800

Comment

Yep. And first came to office in 2001, if I'm not mistaken, as a replacement for the retiring Peters. I know Peterson is the first female Hinds County D.A. Is she also the first non-white? Because I think that's playing a major role in this. Women are traditionally seen as "soft on crime," for the obvious reasons, and black folks are also traditionally seen as "soft on crime," for the obvious reasons. Any white male--even one with no prosecutorial experience--is bound to pick up a sizeable chunk of the voting demographic just for being white and male. That she was reelected by a landslide--60% of the vote--in 2003 is testimony, I think, to how far Jackson has progressed. That her opponent got 40% of the vote is a little confusing to me. I want to know who thought he was more qualified to serve as D.A. than she was. Oops. I'm sorry; it was the Clarion-Ledger. In the immortal words of George Custer: What the hell?! Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-08T21:54:54-06:00

ID

120801

Comment

(By "Jackson" I mean "Hinds County," though I think Jacksonians probably supported her more than the suburbanites did. Cheers, TH)

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-08T21:56:40-06:00

ID

120802

Comment

What I thought was funny, also: "It's time for a change" was the C-L slogan for Peterson's opponent. Peterson had only been in office for two years. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-08T21:58:41-06:00

ID

120803

Comment

On WAPT last night, Melton said they were fired for numerous reasons, including rape. There's no link for this story on the Web site, so I hope someone who saw it can confirm what I am saying. Found it! Guess it just got posted.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2006-01-09T12:40:51-06:00

ID

120804

Comment

OK, I still ask. Where are the arrests? You don't just fire someone for rape; you arrest them. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE???

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-09T13:13:33-06:00

ID

120805

Comment

What he means by this...and I know from professional reasons is that they were, or had been, investigated for assault/rape/innappropriate contact with a female while in their role as a Police Officer. It had either been swept up, or under the rug, and they were carrying on in their duties. Melton got rid of them. Now, I don't know the particular details of ALL of these cases, per se. But, I do know the particular details of ONE...and I'm extrapolating based upon that. So, take this with the grain of salt it commands. ;) In some cases I'm thinking it was something that they weren't able to "prove" in a court of law, but was questionable enough that they relieved them of their duty. But, I'm with you. Still a shady way to handle it. There are so many instances of officers being unseemly with women that don't get handled correctly.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-01-09T13:20:56-06:00

ID

120806

Comment

That last statement was meant horribly sarcastically.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-01-09T13:23:27-06:00

ID

120807

Comment

OK, I see your point. BUT if they couldn't prove it, can they go around calling it "rape"? And what does that do to the morale of the city to know that bunch of "rapists" are running loose ... and now pissed off and unemployed? I'm starting to get a real education into the way the city has historically dealt with sexual assault, and it is worrying me.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-01-09T13:24:49-06:00

ID

120808

Comment

Ali said, "In some cases I'm thinking it was something that they weren't able to "prove" in a court of law, but was questionable enough that they relieved them of their duty." Do I need to remind anyone of the questionable allegations against a certain, ahem, person? Seems allegations should be the last thing getting someone fired this year! I'd be interested in seeing if there were/are arrests to go along with the terminations and whether the employees had overall good records/reviews outside any "allegations".

Author

kaust

Date

2006-01-09T16:28:53-06:00

ID

120809

Comment

I'm of two minds on this. I have no real problem with chiefs firing police officers for rape allegations that they consider credible, but which have not yet been backed up in a court of law; remember that bishops not doing this with priests was a major reason why there was a clergy abuse scandal. Suspension is usually the way to go in these matters, but if they've been long-term cases where the victims do not want to press charges, then termination is probably the more appropriate choice. And I have no problem with chiefs firing police officers prior to charges being formally pressed, because I can understand the reticence of many victims to press charges against a police officer currently on the force, who will see the report and joke about it with his buddies as they bring it in. Yes, this will piss off the police officer. So would pressing charges and having the officer arrested, right before he bonds out. So would virtually any proactive measure. This is the major reason why rape goes unreported as often as it does. What I do have a problem with is Melton alleging rape as the result of an internal decision in which criminal charges have not yet been proven, because it means politicizing an ongoing criminal investigation (which could make life difficult for the accuser and prosecution, not to mention officers fired for other reasons) and unnecessarily exposing the chief to civil liability. Yes, I realize there's a catch-22 here: He gets landed on for not giving a reason, he gets landed on for giving a reason. But this ain't how. "Gross misconduct" is all he needs to say at this point. Save the word "rape" for when their butts are sitting in jail. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-09T16:47:46-06:00

ID

120810

Comment

That was my point, Tom. Melton should NOT have used the term "rape". But, I'm thinking, he with his shortsited visions, didn't understand that would make people ask MORE questions rather than silence them. Which is what I"m assuming he wanted. I just feel as if he assumed if he said "They were fired for rape" we would all scream "Yeah, Yippie. That's fabulous. Good Job." And, never ask "well, um, why aren't they going to JAIL, then?" Different symptom, same disease. Meltonitius: a large, oftentimes, ego-eating disease that blocks all brain functioning that normally occurs between your head and your mouth. Most often resulting in expulsion thru the anal orifice. Ya'll can thank me for that later, I'm off to an appointment.

Author

Lori G

Date

2006-01-09T16:51:42-06:00

ID

120811

Comment

Funny: Meltonitus... I was thinking of Meltonoma but hadn't found a clever use for it yet. Permission granted to use with proper credits of course. I love you Ali and if this ex-gay class works, I'm yours forever.

Author

kaust

Date

2006-01-09T16:55:23-06:00

ID

120812

Comment

As far as charges not being pursued goes: There is a clause in the Mississippi Code that explicitly prohibits prosecution of rape in cases where the victim's testimony is the only admissible evidence. It is also nearly impossible to prosecute rape in cases where the victim is not willing to press charges; as Ali can probably tell you from her work, this never happens unless the victim is dead or incapacitated. So I can easily see scenarios where Chief Anderson would have reason to believe that rape had occurred but would not be in a position to see that the offender was arrested and prosecuted. I don't blame her for this. In fact, I'm pretty glad she did it. None of this changes the fact that rape is horribly underreported, particularly in this state, where the culture is one that does not seem to particularly value women. The truth is that if the officer had raped the victim non-vaginally, then he wouldn't be facing rape charges anyway. That's how backward the current laws are. And it's just the tip of the iceberg. MCASA, the Jackson Rape Crisis Center, and other groups are all trying to change specific things to create a climate that they know will increase the prosecution of rape. They probably also have a really good statistical idea of how often rape is underreported here relative to the rest of the country. I can see huge potential to a future piece of some kind on their efforts, and what they consider to be priorities in this struggle. If you'd like, I can make a few phone calls. Cheers, TH

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-09T16:59:37-06:00

ID

120813

Comment

(Meltonitis! I love it!)

Author

Tom Head

Date

2006-01-09T17:02:57-06:00

ID

120814

Comment

"Meltonitius: a large, oftentimes, ego-eating disease that blocks all brain functioning that normally occurs between your head and your mouth. Most often resulting in expulsion thru the anal orifice." Damn - they're the same symptoms as "PAT ROBERTSON SYNDROME" or PRS for short. Except with PRS your brain tells you to say that GOD told you to shoot off your mouth...

Author

MANGUM

Date

2006-01-09T18:18:47-06:00

ID

120815

Comment

I drafted and submitted a request to the City Clerk’s Office today requesting Chief Anderson’s resume`. I’m not sure if this was the correct way of going about it, but I was pressed for time! I’ll post any response I receive.

Author

K RHODES

Date

2006-01-09T18:51:50-06:00