Looking back to the Ddg post in August of this year which shows an award being given that was not deserved or earned. The award still stands.
What does that show? It shows that when a problem is put in front of glick, he ignores it. How does glick know about it? Well, you should know that longshanks or someone in the command staff monitors this blog. How is this known? By the content of the idiocy in the comments that show up on Ddg without name and are deleted after being shared for a good laugh. Keep them coming!
Ddg can only hope that those comments are not being sent on county time using county computers. Unlike the comments sent to wte (the local paper that blindly supports this type of sheriff) in their published comments supporting longshanks that were sent on county computers on county time by county employees. Maybe danny boy didn't think that was general knowledge. It is!
So now it has been more than several months since the award was given. Does that cheapen the awards system? Ddg says yes. Do those employees that actually earned their awards deserve to be lumped in with an unearned awards recipient who did not have the integrity to decline the award? Ddg says no.
What will it take for longshanks to take back the award, discipline the sergeant for conduct unbecoming a deputy sheriff, and give the award publicly (with an apology) to those that actually deserve and earned it? It will take a new administration because the problems start and end on longshank's desk. This would mean he would have to admit he made a big mistake in promoting (yes, the sheriff has the final say on promotions) the said sergeant, ignored the problem after being advised of it, and continued to ignore it, hoping that it would go away. Looks like an upcoming case for negligent promotion and retention of said sergeant. That could get someone into the county's deep pockets on a lawsuit. Kind of sounds like ignoring the gorilla in the corner when everyone else can see it. It only makes longshanks look so much smaller by thinking that people are stupid when they are not.
Remember, the voters have approved four more years of this administration. Stay tuned, there will be a lot more to follow! Have another beer, danny boy!
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
The Day After
Well, Ddg did not expect either write in campaign to win, but it sure would have been nice if one had! You would have heard the puckering noise in the northeast corner at 1910 all over town.
So longshanks will continue on for now and the problems will continue to mount. Ddg will continue to keep you informed as the information can be collected and released.
If you work at the sheriff's department and continue to document, document, and document, longshanks just might wind up funding your retirement personally. You know that glick thinks that he is above everyone else. Kind of reminds Ddg of Obama.
"Let's be careful out there"
A memorable and true quote from Hill Street Blues.
So longshanks will continue on for now and the problems will continue to mount. Ddg will continue to keep you informed as the information can be collected and released.
If you work at the sheriff's department and continue to document, document, and document, longshanks just might wind up funding your retirement personally. You know that glick thinks that he is above everyone else. Kind of reminds Ddg of Obama.
"Let's be careful out there"
A memorable and true quote from Hill Street Blues.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Election Day Tuesday November 2, 2010
Tomorrow will be election day. You have a choice to write in either one of the two write in candidates (Bill Thompson or Jess Fresquez) as you see fit. Ddg does not advocate a vote for glick for any reason or even a protest by leaving the voting spot blank. Readers of this blog know the problems that have been addressed and those are just the ones that Ddg has started with. More to come, you bet!
Talk to your family and friends about how important their vote will be tomorrow. Of course there will be the sheep that will blindly follow the self serving information that longshanks has put out. Ignoring the problems that glick has created by eight years of non leadership and vote for the same person. Nothing to be done about those who are believing that "all is well, all is well" except to shake your head and be glad that you know different.
Every vote that glick does not get is another vote closer to putting in a sheriff who will put Laramie County first.
Thank you all for your continuing information, interest, and support.
Remember, Friends Do Not Let Friends Even Think About Voting for Glick
Talk to your family and friends about how important their vote will be tomorrow. Of course there will be the sheep that will blindly follow the self serving information that longshanks has put out. Ignoring the problems that glick has created by eight years of non leadership and vote for the same person. Nothing to be done about those who are believing that "all is well, all is well" except to shake your head and be glad that you know different.
Every vote that glick does not get is another vote closer to putting in a sheriff who will put Laramie County first.
Thank you all for your continuing information, interest, and support.
Remember, Friends Do Not Let Friends Even Think About Voting for Glick
Monday, October 25, 2010
Credibility, Not a Negotiable Trait
When does a deputy lose credibility? It is that one thing that is prized above all else in law enforcement and absolutely essential for law enforcement. Why? Simply put, it is your word against the criminal. When a deputy does not have credibility because he lied, what good is that deputy?
This opens up a whole case of 'if you lied then, can you show that you are not lying now?" The deputy's past and future affidavits, arrests, reports, and anything else the deputy is involved in can be questioned. What happens when the deputy is questioned under oath in court, being asked if the deputy had ever lied before in an official capacity while on duty? Does the deputy tell the truth or lie again? Obviously if the deputy lies and gets caught, there is a chance of being prosecuted for perjury. Well maybe not, given the present sad status at the district attorney's position, but that is another story. Does the deputy admit the lie and throw his whole credibility into question?
Again, this relates directly to the supervision (actually the lack thereof) shown on the department. That a deputy would even think about lying on duty shows that things are very loose further up the chain of command, ending with the sheriff. Of course when you continually lie as glick has done, lying must not be a bad thing. So what are subordinates to think and do?
As to the deputy being given time off and returned to duty again shows the problem at glick's level. The amount of time off without pay would have had to have been signed off by glick. So glick has approved a suspension that returned a deputy to duty that lied on duty.
As this post is for information about the problems that are being fostered and ignored by longshanks, Ddg WILL NOT identify the deputy, either in this post or in any replies to it. Those working at the department know who this deputy is. Talk to one of them if they will talk to you.
Ddg reminds you to write in for one of the other candidates on Tuesday November 2, 2010 because another four years of poor leadership is not in Laramie County's best interest.
Remember: Friends don't let friends vote for glick.
This opens up a whole case of 'if you lied then, can you show that you are not lying now?" The deputy's past and future affidavits, arrests, reports, and anything else the deputy is involved in can be questioned. What happens when the deputy is questioned under oath in court, being asked if the deputy had ever lied before in an official capacity while on duty? Does the deputy tell the truth or lie again? Obviously if the deputy lies and gets caught, there is a chance of being prosecuted for perjury. Well maybe not, given the present sad status at the district attorney's position, but that is another story. Does the deputy admit the lie and throw his whole credibility into question?
Again, this relates directly to the supervision (actually the lack thereof) shown on the department. That a deputy would even think about lying on duty shows that things are very loose further up the chain of command, ending with the sheriff. Of course when you continually lie as glick has done, lying must not be a bad thing. So what are subordinates to think and do?
As to the deputy being given time off and returned to duty again shows the problem at glick's level. The amount of time off without pay would have had to have been signed off by glick. So glick has approved a suspension that returned a deputy to duty that lied on duty.
As this post is for information about the problems that are being fostered and ignored by longshanks, Ddg WILL NOT identify the deputy, either in this post or in any replies to it. Those working at the department know who this deputy is. Talk to one of them if they will talk to you.
Ddg reminds you to write in for one of the other candidates on Tuesday November 2, 2010 because another four years of poor leadership is not in Laramie County's best interest.
Remember: Friends don't let friends vote for glick.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Firing For Reports Not Done
So the word is that the two deputies terminated from working off duty security at the Outlaw was for not filing a report.
So Ddg must ask, where was the supervision for the last few years that allowed deputies to believe that they did not have to file a report regarding an assault and battery? Especially one in which an ambulance had to be called for one of the parties? No matter that it was for the one determined to be the aggressor.
Where was the shift supervisor? Does he not care that an ambulance was dispatched? Did he not know? Does he even know what his responsibilities are? It all reflects on the sheriff, it starts at the top and trickles down.
The answer is that things have been allowed to go their own ways until an incident such as this appears. Instead of properly blaming the supervision up through the chain of command to longshanks (who is ultimately responsible), it is much easier to fire two deputies than to put the responsibility where it belongs, right on the sheriff's desk. It is the blame that is due to the poor supervision that has been going on for the last eight years.
Contrast that to the deputy who had dozens of reports that were not done. This deputy was not fired, only given some time off without pay and reassigned. Where was the supervision on this one? Were none of the reports "important" enough that no one missed them? Or were the victims involved in the reports not "important" enough? Do these victims know that they are being ignored? It boils down to the poor supervision or no supervision that starts with the sheriff and infects the whole department.
So Ddg must ask, where was the supervision for the last few years that allowed deputies to believe that they did not have to file a report regarding an assault and battery? Especially one in which an ambulance had to be called for one of the parties? No matter that it was for the one determined to be the aggressor.
Where was the shift supervisor? Does he not care that an ambulance was dispatched? Did he not know? Does he even know what his responsibilities are? It all reflects on the sheriff, it starts at the top and trickles down.
The answer is that things have been allowed to go their own ways until an incident such as this appears. Instead of properly blaming the supervision up through the chain of command to longshanks (who is ultimately responsible), it is much easier to fire two deputies than to put the responsibility where it belongs, right on the sheriff's desk. It is the blame that is due to the poor supervision that has been going on for the last eight years.
Contrast that to the deputy who had dozens of reports that were not done. This deputy was not fired, only given some time off without pay and reassigned. Where was the supervision on this one? Were none of the reports "important" enough that no one missed them? Or were the victims involved in the reports not "important" enough? Do these victims know that they are being ignored? It boils down to the poor supervision or no supervision that starts with the sheriff and infects the whole department.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Two Write In Candidates
Jess Fresquez and Bill Thompson both appear to want your write in vote. Look to the candidate's qualifications to see which one would make a better sheriff than longshanks.
Your vote will make a difference, don't let the bs slow you down from making a write in choice.
Remember, Friends don't let friends vote for glick.
Your vote will make a difference, don't let the bs slow you down from making a write in choice.
Remember, Friends don't let friends vote for glick.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Write In Bill Thompson for Sheriff
Based on the email received regarding a write in campaign for Bill Thompson, Ddg will put it forward to the readers. This will be the second write in campaign for the general election, so pass the word and vote your choice.
Write ins are easy on either the paper or the electronic version. If you have a question, just ask before you vote.
Talk with your friends because:
Friends do not let friends vote for glick.
Write ins are easy on either the paper or the electronic version. If you have a question, just ask before you vote.
Talk with your friends because:
Friends do not let friends vote for glick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)