CANTON POLICING: IS CANTON A PLACE WHERE YOU WOULD WANT TO LIVE? CANTON POLICE GET IN WAY OF CITIZEN TRYING TO MAKE NEIGHBORHOOD SAFER? HMM?

CANTON'S POLICE & PROSECUTOR

Under the category of "no good deed goes unpunished," the Canton Police Department, apparently (a SCPR opinion) not having been thoroughly checked out by the Canton Law Department's prosecutor's office (in terms of the quality of police department's case), recently proceeded against a Mister Tony Porterfield of 12th Street, Northeast on a misdemeanor charge of obstructing official business.

(See Despite run-in with police, man still wants a better neighborhood, The Repository, Shane Hoover, 11/22/2012)

CITIZEN PORTERFIELD

Mr. Porterfield in recent years purchased and moved into a residence on 12th Street right in the heart of 2nd Ward Councilman Thomas West's neighborhood.

His motive?  To have a quality home of his own and to help himself and his neighbors reclaim their neighborhood from the criminals and thugs who seem to have the run of Canton's inner wards.

Talk about a counterintuitive move, Porterfield's move into Mister West's neighborhood has to be a prime example.

CANTON'S CRIME DATA

That is, if the website "Neighborhood Scout" data is to be believed.

According to the website, Canton has a safety "crime index of 4."  Yes, "4" out of a possible maximum index of 100 which at 100 would be a completely safe neighborhood.

Of course, at the other end:  "4," - the neighborhood is completely unsafe.

CANTON'S HEALY ADMINISTRATION

So much for the Healy administration's Zero Tolerance program now that he has been reelected mayor for a second term, no?

Hmm?

February 9, 2010?

It's been nearly three years since Healy has been trumpeting on the city's website his crime interdiction success (i.e. Canton crime rate down 19.5%).

Hmm?

CITIZEN PORTERFIELD

Porterfield seems to be a "good Samaritan" of sorts.  He says in Hoover's report of his acquittal by jury of his peers (eight Canton Municipal Court jurisdiction citizens) within minutes their getting the case (as quoted in the Hoover article):

“I was looking for a place to reside and stay forever,” the 43-year-old Alliance native said.

The bushes and grass around his home are neatly trimmed. A flag hangs from a corner of the porch. A red metal roof is the most visible sign of Porterfield’s effort to remodel the house and a building next door.

The neighbors on his block look out for each other. If a strange car is parked in the neighborhood, he will get a call or a text from a neighbor asking him to check it out, Porterfield said.

THE INCIDENT

On July 9th of this year, a couple of Canton's finest parked their unmarked vehicle close to Porterfield's home on a mission to document an undercover police drug buy.

Unmarked car?

Police presumably in plain clothes?

In a neighborhood that is one of the most crime infested in all of America?

A man and neighbors who are determined to take their neighborhood back from the criminals?

Of course, the highly civic minded Porterfield is going to be asking questions, no?

And, indeed, he does!

Perfectly understandable and as it turns out, in the view of The Report, heroic.

According to Hoover, the police said:

• "they politely explained they were conducting an investigation and showed their badges, but Porterfield refused to leave and began talking loudly and drawing attention to their vehicle,"
• Porterfield refused to stop drawing attention to their vehicle, and persisted to the point of trying to record the license plate number of the unmarked vehicle whereupon he was arrested

Porterfield's account was quite different, to wit:

• he was sworn at and told to get back in his house, and
• the policemen never showed him a badge

The Report finds Porterfield's account more believable than the officers on the basis of:

• his motivation to make the neighborhood a safer one,
• a reading of Hoover's report (the actual lines and between the lines), and
• a lifetime of experience of dealing with policemen

A DEEPER LOOK AT HOOVER'S REPORT

The SCPR picks out some key points from the report to chew on just a little:

• KEY POINT ONE - If Tony Porterfield had his way, a police cruiser would be parked on his street and officers would get to know the neighborhood by patrolling on foot.
• COMMENT:  A man who not only does not resent a police presence in his neighborhood but wants them there and on foot to boot.  Hardly, someone who going to get testy with police, unprovoked.
• KEY POINT TWO - What exactly happened to Porterfield is in dispute — he has his version, the police have theirs and a jury acquitted him [within minutes of receiving the case] of misdemeanor obstructing official business — but the incident comes at a time when officer conduct and the department’s relationship with the community have been under scrutiny.
• COMMENT 1:   "... acquitted him [within minutes of the jury having received the case]... ."   Hmm?  Within minutes?   Doesn't take a rocket scientist, err legal professional, to tell one something about the quality of the case notwithstanding what Chief Lawver and what Canton Law Director Joe Martuccio say about the unpredictability of jury decisions.
• COMMENT 2:  "... incident comes at a time when officer conduct [e.g. Daniel Harless] and the department's relationship with the community [outbreak of summer shootings] have been under scrutiny."  Hmm?  Perhaps Chief Lawver is feeling a bit defensive these days and in no mood to square up with the Canton public and admit that he has some major reform to do within the Canton Police Department (CPD) in terms of how to connect to, relate to, and work with everyday Cantonians?

SCPR OVERALL IMPRESSION OF POLICING IN CANTON

The SCPR believes that the Healy administration has politicized the effectiveness of policing in Canton.

Mayor William J. Healy's trump card in getting elected in 2007 was to promise zero tolerance of crime in Canton.

Even though it is apparent that his political campaign ploy has not worked, Cantonians nonetheless are putting increasing pressure on the CPD to deliver on the failed Healy administration promise to make Canton's neighborhoods safer.

But the police lack the manpower and financial resources to do so.  Accordingly, you get folks like Porterfield who get directly involved in making neighborhoods safer.  And you have the police turning to community policing efforts to make up for their inadequacies.

It seems to The Report that the newly appointed chief (Lawver) is feeling pressure big time to roll back an apparent upsurge in Canton crime.

And the July 9th incident and its attendant failure to deal effectively with a well-meaning citizen did not help matters any.

Hoover's article insofar as it refers to the chief, reeks (in the opinion of the SCPR) of a man grasping for excuses/justifications (e.g. runaway jury?; uncharacteristic of McWilliams [one of the involved officers]; won't second guess; "highly successful and conscientious officers") and of a public official who may be out-of-touch with the citizenry and communicates such to his rank-and-file policemen/women.

And there may be another factor.

The SCPR addresses the possibility in the form of a question:  Is the Canton city prosecutor's office too tight with the Canton Police Department?

Yours truly addressed that question to Canton law director Joseph Martuccio this past Friday.

With the jury voting to acquit Porterfield "within minutes" of receiving the case, one has to wonder what kind of vetting that the prosecutor's office did on the quality/strength of the McWilliams/Gabbard (the other involved officer) case against Citizen Porterfield?

Yours truly's daughter was a police prosecutor in Georgia for some five years (probably 2005 - 2010) and so thereby The Report does have some insight into a typical prosecutor/police relationship.

One of the things daughter did as prosecutor was to shore up some pretty sloppy police work (before she got on the job) in terms of having a provable case.  Moreover, she always made sure she was the decider-in-chief as to whether or not a prosecution would go forward.

While the Porterfield case is not quite the same thing (i.e. sloppy police work) inasmuch as it boiled down to a "my word against your word" situation; the "within minutes" verdict indicates to a reasonably thinking person that there may have been something very wrong in terms of the Canton prosecutor office's analysis of the quality of the case to be brought to prosecution.

LAW DIRECTOR MARTUCCIO

Back to the SCPR's question of Law Director Martuccio.

The essence of his answer?

"You never know what a jury is going to do."

Additionally, Martuccio denied that if a Canton policeman makes an arrest, it automatically parlays into a prosecution in terms of the relationship between his prosecutors and the police.  However, he added that "it is rare" when an arrest does not result in a prosecution.

As for Martuccio's "you never know what a jury is going to do," such is the identical thing that Canton Police Chief Lawver said to Rep reporter Hoover.

Is that to say that law enforcement/prosecutions are a roll of the dice?

Prosecutions must have a rock-solid basis to them.

After all,  you are dealing with ramifications on the future of citizens who have differences with Canton police officials.

As reported by Hoover:

Porterfield said he does his best to look out for trouble, but a run-in with two undercover city police officers this summer almost cost him his freedom and his military career, and left him with a sense of unease about calling 911.

The Report does not accept, nor should the Canton public, that in prosecuting cases that the police department appear to be treated by the Canton prosecutor's office as being determinative clients.

And, as indicated previously as implied in The Report's reference to daughter-prosecutor; in working closely on quality case preparation prosecutors and police are susceptible of developing too tight of a relationship.  Perhaps, so much so that prosecutors might forget who their real client is.

As the SCPR sees it, prosecutions are always to be pursued on behalf of "the people" in the pursuit of truth and justice; not as vindication of a police decision to arrest.  In fact, in many jurisdictions the cases are captioned:  "People versus John Doe."

The SCPR chooses not to think in terms of the Lawver/Martuccio posited implication.

Rather The Report sees the situation as being a jury of responsible citizens doing their civic duty.

The Report is told that The Repository does not generally cover misdemeanor cases.

That it did in the Porterfield situation, from the SCPR's perspective, is important in terms of The Report's thinking that Canton police and law department officials and the Canton safety director (former Canton policeman Tom Ream) of the Healy administration being put on notice that they all need to clean up their processes.

The Report thinks for Tony Porterfield to have:

• located into a notoriously crime-infested Canton neighborhood,
• spent his hard earned dollars rehabbing the property, and
• working collaboratively with neighbors and the police to clear the community of crime

and to have gotten kicked in the teeth by Canton police officialdom is an outrage.

The Porterfield case should give us all pause for thought.

There but for the grace of God go you and I.

And Canton officials wonder why people are moving out of Canton in droves?

SEE VIDEO: WILL THE "CANTON CHARTER MOVEMENT" EVER SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY? IS ITS COFFIN BEING PREPARED AS WE SPEAK?

Are there five members ("coffin nails?") of Canton City Council poised to vote "no" in putting the matter of whether or not Canton should form a commission to make a proposal for a charter form of city government?

Perhaps.

At last Monday's Council meeting the Reverend C. David Morgan engaged Council in the Public Speaks forum that is available to citizens to address Council?

 

His topic?

The "apparent" naysayers on Council on the charter issue.

Before the meeting, the SCPR spoke with Canton Law Director Joe Martuccio about progress on putting together legislation as requested by Republican Councilman Mark Butterworth in a June 10th communication to Council.

Martuccio said he is working with Butterworth to craft the necessary legislation and things are going well but that there is little doubt that the measure will have to wait until May, 2011 before getting on the ballot.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Thomas West tells The Report he is waiting for Butterworth to schedule "educational sessions" with members of Council before considering whether or not to recommend passage of the measure out of committee onto the Council as a whole to vote on placing the measure on the May ballot.

Yours truly is getting vibes that Butterworth faces a major problem in getting the charter consideration on the ballot.

The Report believes that there is a stealth undertow among Canton City Council members to take Butterworth's proposal under (bury it) in the procedures of Council so that it does not make it onto the ballot.

Butterworth has told The Report that he is confident that he can get the eight of twelve votes needed on Council to pass the proposal on for Cantonians to vote on.

But can he?

In the view of the SCPR, there are a core group of Council members who like the security (with respect to their personal political interests) of keeping things in Canton the way they are.  And, while they will not openly fight reform of Canton city government, the will wage a "secret" war from within the maze of parliamentary-esque procedures to slowly kill the measure.

Sort of like putting nails (at least five of them) in the lid of the coffin bearing the body of Canton Charter Commission one at a time until the coffin is sealed and placed six foot underground.

Pastor Morgan's talk last Monday is clear indication that all is not well with the charter initiative.

Councilman Butterworth is now working carefully with his fellow members in order to secure the needed eight votes. However, he made a huge political mistake in being the sole councilperson to sign on to seeking the legislation.  Perhaps, that political procedural mistake was, in and of itself, enough to make prospective supporters of the legislation "nails in the coffin" preparatory to burying the body of Canton Charter Commission.

The real question remaining is: are there five nails waiting to be driven in the the coffin lid as the final act prior to burial?

Or is there going to be a revival of the body Canton Charter Commission to stand before the voters of Canton?

Here is Pastor Morgan voicing his concern with the "straying" members of Canton City Council.

DISCUSSION: THE REPOSITORY CONTINUES ITS MISERABLE JOB IN REPORTING & EDITORIALIZING ON "THE HEALY FIASCO!"

One consistent thing about The Repository on the what the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT (The Report) now dubs for the first time "the Healy fiasco," is how tardy The Rep has been in reporting on or editorializing on with respect each issue surfacing in "the Healy fiasco."

Only one year into 15 months into his administration, The Report is now ready to say that the Healy administration is a complete failure in terms of losing the confidence of most Cantonians in pulling Canton out of its economic and political stupor.

What is amazing is the degree to which TeamHealy has bamboozled The Canton Repository "powers that be."

Why is this so?

The Report believes that Executive Editor Jeff Gauger and his fellows at The Rep are unsure as to whether or not the Healy administration is going to survive. Moreover, The Rep folks know full-well how punitive Healy is of those who do not do his bidding. So, if he does limp through his remaining 33 months, they likely surmise that getting news out of city hall will be worse that pulling teeth.

Another issue The Report has with The Rep is summed up in the next two sentences.

The Report uses material of The Repository frequently. And which yours truly does, proper attribution is accorded The Rep.

The reverse does not appear to be true.

Ed Balint's article, dated at about midnight yesterday, miserably fails to credit the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT for being an agent of the "stirring." The only journalistic effort to tie campaign contributions to Mayor Healy awarding contracts has been from The Report and WHBC's "Points to Ponder" (Ron Ponder - talk show host). But curiously miss from Balint's piece is a reference to either The Report or "Points to Ponder."

The Report has had several confirmations that the folks at The Rep follow what The Report's blog. A person from its editorial department e-mailed The Report to correct an incorrect (The Rep having made the initial error) attribution to a Repository editorial The Report was commenting on. And reporter Malcolm Hall of The Rep called The Rep about material The Report has published on the current Marlboro Township turmoil about efforts of township trustees to fire its police chief.

As The Report told Hall, he and The Rep is free to use The Report's material as long as The Rep attributes the source.

The Report has learned that Canton City Council leader Bill Smuckler has commented that the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT is the only Stark County journalistic effort that has gotten it right on the Healy administration machinations.

Now the Balint story itself.

Notice that Canton Law Director Martuccio couches his analysis in the expression "legally speaking." What this means to The Report is that Martuccio believes that the Healy administration has "the spirit of the law"l problems in the quid pro quo appearing arrangement on Healy's award of the Johnson contract. What's more, Martuccio skillfully qualifies his "legally speaking" with "this is the first time I have looked at the law." The qualification leaves Martuccio with wiggle room for later on. Perhaps, as the Healy administration is on its way out the door?

Healy (in The Rep's article): 'wanted to avoid even the appearance of impropriety in this situation.' What is this Mayor, a joke?

The mere utterance of the expression is that the Mayor understands that the impression is clearly out there in the public square. This tactic is what lawyers call a "confession and avoidance."

Every rhetorical device that Jamey Healy uses bespeaks a man who thinks he can outsmart the whole world with his glib tongue.

And it is working with at least one Stark County entity: THE CANTON REPOSITORY!

It should tell readers volumes that Healy is willing to talk with The Rep's people WHEREAS he will not nor permit his Communications Direct Adam Herman to talk to the STARK COUNTY POLITICAL REPORT.

The Report trusts that the highly respected Canton Law Director Joe Martuccio will not let Healy hoodwink him. He needs to remember that Healy has undermined the public's confidence in his law department by saying, in effect, that his labor negotiating assistant law directors and staff are not ethical enough or expert enough to negotiate an "arms-length" contract with the Canton police unions.

Healy underscored his lack of confidence in the Canton Law Department by reiterating in the Balint piece: "Johnson’s 'experience ... was something that was critical in this process.'

The Report knows Healy well. The Report, at one time, held out hope that Healy could turnaround Canton.

The Report no longer believes Healy can be effective for Canton. Healy needs to move on!!!