Review of Wyman's death won't be released soon

[Clipper]

www.uticaod.com/topstories/x655331663/Review-of-Wyman-s-death-wont-be-released-soon

The subject of whether the strategy and actions that took place that night were flawed or not have been discussed in depth here and other places.

I think that it is only proper for them to withhold the report from the public until after the trial, as long as the defense is allowed access to the investigative report in it's entirety.

I am surprised that the defense has not asked for an investigation by some other agency, or something more than an internal investigation by the Sheriff's Department.

I have the utmost respect and confidence in the Onieda County Sheriff's Dept, and know several of the deputies, but even the best of police agencies are manned by human beings, and human beings are not immune to mistakes and errors in judgement. If there were errors made that night, they need to come to light in order to prevent a repeat performance.

[dgriffin]

Not revealing any of the details until after the trial to enable a proper prosecution is bullshit. Do we think the jury won't see the report? More likely the Sherriff wants to avoid having the conduct of his department on trial in the newspapers with Patterson, which could happen if were issued before or during the trial. Better for Maciol if the report becomes public after the trial when the public has lost interest. Of course, if the report told a story of absolute incompetence on the part of the deputies, it could influence prospective jurors, but such a report seems unlikely even that was true. And besides, the jury is going to demand to know how the police actions affected the critical situation. They'll see the report in any event.

[Clipper]

I guess it depends on what the report contains, and whether the judge allows it into evidence or not. As to whether the jury gets to read it or not, I imagine the judge will have the responsibility to determine if any of the report is pertinent to the fair disposition of the case or not.

[firstamendment]

Bullshit is right. Small problem with that. The report will be requested by the defense to be presented as evidence as it should be. It is an account of what happened and the defense will surely want it. They don't want this to come out what a clusterf*ck that night became because of bad decisions by OCSO.

Exactly right, again, Dave. They will want to see and should be able to see how police action affected the outcome that night. That mitigates what ended up happening practically exclusively. Maciol is hiding the truth.

I read on WKTV a week or so ago when the Undersheriff was quoted that they did everything correctly that night. But further in the same story, states that changes will be made as a result of this investigation. What? If they did nothing wrong, they wouldn't need to make any changes, now would they? Red herring?

I have respect for law enforcement and a good friend in the Sheriff's Office (corrections division) but they really screwed the pooch that night. Without a doubt.

Whether or not the report would taint potential jurors is moot if such report proves the OCSO caused what happened and Patterson ended up defending himself. Maciol is so desperate to hide the truth that they'll try a maneuver like this to hide it from trial. Hope the OD FOIL's it just like they got their hands on the Matt Sullivan video.

Sorry Clip if bringing him up hits a sore spot.

[Clipper]

Not a problem FA. I think that there has to be a distinction made in that the paper said that it would not be made "public", not that it could not be used or made available in the trial, if brought in and deemed pertinent by the lawyers or the judge. The article simply addressed the prejudicial effects of putting the report out to the public.

[firstamendment]

Oh, I must have missed that detail about making it public. Eventually though it needs to be made public because the public needs to know what happened that fateful night.

[Clipper]

I am sure it will be, all in good time. Even the Observer Disgrace is capable of insuring that the local people are made privy to that report. As long as it doesn't pertain to anything New Hartford, they will get right on it.

[dgriffin]

My point was, since the jury will likely see the report, what is the reason why it will be wittheld from the public?

Except for the suspicion I stated, I don't know why the report would be suppressed before the trial. Unless the judge wants it only for the eyes of the jury, but if so he should state why that is reasonable because it doesn't appear so.

I think the jury will find Patterson guilty, but that's a separate argument. Here we're concerned with whether the release of a report on an important police action that went bad should be timed for the convenience of a department's publicity needs.

This issue bothers me because of the opportunity for collusion between the courts and police agencies on matters about which the public should be aware. Many will not agree with me but I have witnessed a tendency on the part of police agencies to look upon the rest of us as perps and dick heads while they circle their wagons to protect themselves from criticism. That is a regrettable trend in a free society.

[clarencebunsen]

An in house review is needed but I would much rather see a report from an outside agency. Perhaps the NY State Police.

[dgriffin]

Aug 25, 2011 12:07:24 GMT -5 clarencebunsen said:

An in house review is needed but I would much rather see a report from an outside agency. Perhaps the NY State Police.

Yes, there's that.

[firstamendment]

An investigation by an outside unrelated agency is not only warranted but should be mandatory. The OSCO can do all the internal assessing it wants, but when a fatality results, there should be a second set of eyes checking it over. Many times proper procedures and techniques are followed and death still occurs. It happens. But that does not appear to be the case here. Given the severity and profile of this case, it screams for an outside investigation.

[dgriffin]

So Maciol's report is his version of the events of that night. If corroborated with the views of other agencies who were there (?), it could be a contribution to our understanding of what happened. Or it could of course be a whitewash. Either way, there is no apparent reason why it should be withheld from the public until after the trial.

“The most important thing we’re trying to do is make sure we’re not interfering in the prosecution of this case,” Maciol said. But that is his opinion and the OD story does not mention the court or the D.A. has requested the report be withheld.

[JGRobinson]

How about a study to determine why this went so bad when the escapee Ft Drummer was pursued across the state and still was taken alive without the loss of life by Police or Civilians.

Its already been done with respect to high speed auto chases; when pursued aggressively, bystanders, police and Perps die all too often and needlessly. Stealing a TV, a car or having a domestic dispute really doesn't need to end up with dead people if handled with a little insight and caution.

I see these cases as much the same, both were VFW's, both were accused of committing crimes much less heinous then the one they were confronted with by the authorities. Both could have ended the same way, why didn't they? I believe that if you corner almost any animal or person, they will react with everything they can deliver, mostly bad. VFW's have the capability of bringing all hell into the scenario in a heartbeat; if they felt they might not survive the situation, why wouldn't they?

Both a Badger and a Tick can hurt or kill but we treat them differently because they have completely different hazards associated with the capture and elimination. Really when it boils down to it, we can argue whether this is special treatment for vets or just plain sensible actions on the Objective.

[firstamendment]

They didn't capture the Fort Drum soldier. He surrendered because he was probably tired of running. He gave up. Funny that he stole a car in West Winfield right down the street from the command post the NYSP set up at the Fire House. Right under their noses when they thought he was out in the woods somewhere. Woops!

[bobbbiez]

Sept 20, 2011 6:08:29 GMT -5 JGRobinson said:

How about a study to determine why this went so bad when the escapee Ft Drummer was pursued across the state and still was taken alive without the loss of life by Police or Civilians.

Its already been done with respect to high speed auto chases; when pursued aggressively, bystanders, police and Perps die all too often and needlessly. Stealing a TV, a car or having a domestic dispute really doesn't need to end up with dead people if handled with a little insight and caution.

I see these cases as much the same, both were VFW's, both were accused of committing crimes much less heinous then the one they were confronted with by the authorities. Both could have ended the same way, why didn't they? I believe that if you corner almost any animal or person, they will react with everything they can deliver, mostly bad. VFW's have the capability of bringing all hell into the scenario in a heartbeat; if they felt they might not survive the situation, why wouldn't they?

Both a Badger and a Tick can hurt or kill but we treat them differently because they have completely different hazards associated with the capture and elimination. Really when it boils down to it, we can argue whether this is special treatment for vets or just plain sensible actions on the Objective.

JR, believe me I'm not trying to be a smart a** but when we start to compare bugs and animals to human behavior I see something drastically wrong with this reasoning.

We can't possibly compare occurrences either. Every human being thinks differently and each situation is never the same because of that. Even with ultimate training can one know what a person will do in any given situation. The what "ifs" will always be there when dealing with humans because there is no way even with training will some situations turn out the way it is written in a training book or the way one thinks it should end.