Doug, I'm so happy you did this. As a fellow attendee of the court proceedings for day #1, I can tell you (and others) that this report reflects "seconds" not "minutes". Thank you.
Thank you. Yesterday was a torrent of information. I barely had time to get my notes into readable form last night, much less do any analysis. When the trial is over I'll have to do a summary.
A huge mess, so much to comment on on both sides, but hopefully the justice system will prevail with what is best here.
Something that sticks out, though - has it ever been denied that the Lt. used these slurs? Was there was no discipline for it? It is really hard to believe that she NEVER said any of those since there are so many reported, and I believe by more than one person (and of course, it is not surprising that she would not be disciplined by her own husband). Those are really horrendous words for someone that is involved with public safety to be using about citizens or anyone, for that matter.
Nottingham should at the very least have a no tolerance policy for their public officials using that kind of talk. The mindset you have to be in to use these words towards people you are treating is actually dangerous.
Here is a relevant passage for you to reread - "The other thing was a credibility issue with the Chief. The Chief categorically denied all accusations. Normally what one sees is that the accused gives a different version of events, not a denial of events. Further, there was a witness who appeared to support the Chief who described witnessing a couple of the denied events, although saying they didn’t happen in the way the accusers had claimed." Listen, the majority of Nottingham wants this to end with justice served. Likely at the end, people will find that the Town did not always act properly throughout the investigation, but also that the Chief was not falsely accused of literally every single complaint listed. Even someone in support of him affirmed one of the issues that the Chief said didn't happen. These things are messy. It is hard to believe that ALL of these issues are hearsay. It was not just one person saying it, and the Chief never met with the Board to clear up any misunderstandings. I am just following the facts. I truly just hope the correct decision based on the evidence prevails.
And here’s something for you and the Nazi sentiment your choosing to align with
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Joseph Goebbels Nazi Party Propaganda Minister.
And when was this meeting with the Chief and the Selectmen supposed to take place?
How can someone meet with a board to discuss an allegation or accusation which was never communicated to that individual?
I think we have different ideas of what a ‘fact’ is or what kind of ‘Justice’ is coming.
Understood, however, this guy took my comment and said that looking at all the facts of the issue was "Nazi sentiment" which is an absolutely wild and over the top reach. I guess now listening to facts brought up in court is what the Nazis would do. No wonder the Chief is where he is at if this is what his supporters are like.
Thank you for your reporting. Should be required reading for all voters!!
Doug, I'm so happy you did this. As a fellow attendee of the court proceedings for day #1, I can tell you (and others) that this report reflects "seconds" not "minutes". Thank you.
Outstanding reporting thank you Doug your work is appreciated and clearly valuable to the knowledgeable residents of Nottingham
Thank you. Yesterday was a torrent of information. I barely had time to get my notes into readable form last night, much less do any analysis. When the trial is over I'll have to do a summary.
A huge mess, so much to comment on on both sides, but hopefully the justice system will prevail with what is best here.
Something that sticks out, though - has it ever been denied that the Lt. used these slurs? Was there was no discipline for it? It is really hard to believe that she NEVER said any of those since there are so many reported, and I believe by more than one person (and of course, it is not surprising that she would not be disciplined by her own husband). Those are really horrendous words for someone that is involved with public safety to be using about citizens or anyone, for that matter.
Nottingham should at the very least have a no tolerance policy for their public officials using that kind of talk. The mindset you have to be in to use these words towards people you are treating is actually dangerous.
‘So much to comment on’ and you’re here to focus on the hearsay, which was all previously denied.
This case is about the Chief, but I’m sure we’ll get to the bottom of it ALL before this leaves the courtroom.
Here is a relevant passage for you to reread - "The other thing was a credibility issue with the Chief. The Chief categorically denied all accusations. Normally what one sees is that the accused gives a different version of events, not a denial of events. Further, there was a witness who appeared to support the Chief who described witnessing a couple of the denied events, although saying they didn’t happen in the way the accusers had claimed." Listen, the majority of Nottingham wants this to end with justice served. Likely at the end, people will find that the Town did not always act properly throughout the investigation, but also that the Chief was not falsely accused of literally every single complaint listed. Even someone in support of him affirmed one of the issues that the Chief said didn't happen. These things are messy. It is hard to believe that ALL of these issues are hearsay. It was not just one person saying it, and the Chief never met with the Board to clear up any misunderstandings. I am just following the facts. I truly just hope the correct decision based on the evidence prevails.
And here’s something for you and the Nazi sentiment your choosing to align with
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Joseph Goebbels Nazi Party Propaganda Minister.
And when was this meeting with the Chief and the Selectmen supposed to take place?
How can someone meet with a board to discuss an allegation or accusation which was never communicated to that individual?
I think we have different ideas of what a ‘fact’ is or what kind of ‘Justice’ is coming.
Please keep it civil here. Calling things "Nazi" just inflames things.
It was meant as a historical reference.
Lol - Nazi sentiment. You're a joker. Go touch grass.
Please keep it civil here. Calling someone a "joker" just inflames things.
Understood, however, this guy took my comment and said that looking at all the facts of the issue was "Nazi sentiment" which is an absolutely wild and over the top reach. I guess now listening to facts brought up in court is what the Nazis would do. No wonder the Chief is where he is at if this is what his supporters are like.
The town is inept and mismanaged