Showing posts with label Canton Police Chief Dean L. McKimm. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canton Police Chief Dean L. McKimm. Show all posts

Friday, July 22, 2011

CAN DEAN MCKIM SURVIVE AS CANTON POLICE CHIEF IN LIGHT OF OFFICER DANIEL HARLESS JUNE 11TH VIDEOTAPED INCIDENT? HOW ABOUT SAFETY DIRECTOR THOMAS REAM?


Pictured above is Canton Chief of Police as he appeared before the media on June 23, 2007 (the day that Canton Police Officer Bobby Cutts, Jr. was arrested for two counts of murder) to reassure the Canton/Stark County public that the Canton Police Department (CPD)  would deal with one of its own in the light of the facts that evolved in the investigation of the allegation against Cutts.

In the Cutts case, McKimm, of course, responded immediately.  The Cutts case was easy for the chief to deal with.  Cutts was in jail and he was convicted on February 15, 2008 and sentenced to life in prison without eligibility for parole for 57 years. but with an officer who was incarcerated.

But should Cutts have been a Canton policeman in the first place?

According to a report by Edd Pritchard of The Repository dated June 19, 2007, Sheriff, FBI agents search Cutts' home:
In 1998, before he joined the Canton Police Department, Cutts was found guilty of aggravated criminal trespass for breaking into [Nikki] Giavasis' [the mother of his child] apartment in Jackson Township. He pleaded no contest, was found guilty and placed on three years probation. He was hired to the Canton force in 2000.

...

In February 2003, Cutts was fired from the police department after an investigation into how his cousin ended up with Cutts' service weapon. Cutts claimed the weapon was stolen. Police administrators believed Cutts gave the weapon to his cousin. But an arbitrator determined the incident wasn't a good enough reason to dismiss Cutts and he was reinstated.
On June 8, 2011 another case of "dealing with one of our own" for McKimm to deal with, in terms of allegations of a Canton policeman wrong doing, was birthed.

For readers who have not seen the video, CLICK HERE for the link.

This time McKimm has a much more difficult task on his hand.

And the question is not so much how Harless will be dealt with, but how long McKimm and his boss Safety Director Thomas Ream have known about the incident before placing the officer on administrative leave sometime in June.

A paramount question that McKimm and Ream have to answer is why they did not get out in front on this matter?

They needed to bring it to the public's attention before it hit the media and present a convincing case to the public that the attitude demonstrated in the video is atypical because the Canton Police Department has mechanisms in place to filter out officers who have attitude issues before incidents like what occurred on June 8th transpire.

If a plausible explanation is not forthcoming, then it is incumbent on Mayor Healy to step in and ensure to the public's satisfaction that remedial policies and procedures are put in place and perhaps including disciplinary action against McKimm and Ream.

The SCPR has talked with a prominent Stark County police official who shared the following observations/comments:
  • questions whether or not McKimm historically has effectively handled allegations of Canton police misconduct.
  • questions the quality of training of police officers in Canton.  
    • the SCPR's source was incredulous that the other officer on the scene did not intervene to settle Harless down.
    • could not believe that the car was being searched without taking everybody out of it first.
    • the officer's refusal to listen to the subject about having a permit to carrying the gun.
  • Canton needs to significantly improve the quality of background investigations, internal affairs investigations and disciplinary processes.
  • worried that the culture of the CPD is such that it encourages police wrongdoing,
    • a key to watch, the source says, is the union's reaction.  Does it circle the wagons or does it stand up and distance the working officers of the department from what the video shows.
  • believes that McKimm in the sense that he appears to have failed to have systematic and escalating processes in place to prevent what happened on June 8th should be accountable in terms of "the buck stops here."  The source would be surprised to learn that there were no other incidents involving Harless.  It all goes back - The Report's source says - to McKimm and what he believes to have been ineffective police corp control and that McKimm bears responsibility for the development of what appears to be a culture of tolerance if not encouragement of cop on the beat arrogance.
 In light of the police source's criticism of the Canton police administration, it may be a good idea for Cantonians to attend the Canton Police Academy.  While there, they may want to inquire into background check procedures, the operation of internal affairs and the CPD disciplinary processes.

Another source in a position to know tells the SCPR that McKimm rules the department in a military fashion, but does not have the respect of the Canton police force.  McKimm, the source says, is a technocrat who does not get out and around his troops connecting with them on a day-to-day basis and therefore not in a position to have the pulse of the department within his grasp.

If the source is correct in assessing McKimm, it appears that one side of McKimm does take with some of the CPD officers is a dictatorial manner that seems to be more appropriate in a military context than in a city police department where the clientele is citizen based and not focused on dealing with enemies.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

SCPR "ELECTION 2009 SERIES" (VOL 16): CANAL FULTON CITY COUNCIL - A CLASSIC "THE WAY THINGS ARE" VERSUS "CHANGE IS DESPERATELY NEEDED" BATTLE!


The political battle lines are drawn in Canal Fulton.

It is the "establishment" versus "agents of change in the November 3rd elections for seats on Canal Fulton City Council.

On September 14th, the Canal Fulton Friends of the Library held a "get to know the candidates" night at The Chapel, a long term care facility located north and east of the canal boat city.

To fully understand the charges, the reactions and countercharges that are made by several of the candidates in the video which readers can see below, CLICK HERE to see the list of ten deficiencies in Canal Fulton government as generated by "the slate of four" who are running to effect change.

Although the SCPR believes that the "agents of change" are - separate and apart from their agenda - more talented in terms of the cognitive abilities than the incumbents running for re-election; if readers like how Canal Fulton has been governed, then the incumbents as a group are the candidates to vote for.

The only viable wild card in this race is Susan Mayberry.  She worked in administration (non-elected) for a number of years and clearly knows the mechanics of governance.  But she is a wild card.

How se?

At The Chapel, Mayberry talked and talked and talked about integrity.  Integrity as a general quality that an officeholder should have and as a specific characteristic for those who sit on Canal Fulton City Council.

Who can argue with that?  It would be like coming out against God, mother and country.

Mayberry might turn out to be a high quality legislator, but, then again, she may never get "enough facts" to be productive as a councilperson.  Such was her excuse for have no specific agenda if she were to be elected. 

Anyone voting for this woman would be taking a chance.  She is vivacious and appears reasonably intelligent, but what is the "real" reason she has no thought-out legislative agenda?

Another candidate that makes the SCPR nervous is Ken Gabbard.

Gabbard is only one of two candidates (the other being Cihon) that got no film footage in the video that accompanies this blog.

The reason?

He had nothing at all to say about the substantive issues facing Canal Fulton.  He told personal tales indicating that he is a "stable" person.  Wow!

By his self-description, he made it clear that he doesn't have the capacity to say in 3 minutes what one can take 30 minutes to do.  Obviously, a bright guy who has demonstrated in business that he is an accomplished person following the direction of others.  He does not appear to have his own perspective.

In the judgment of the SCPR, on Council, he will likely follow the lead of either Bagocious, Buwala or Mouse. Gabbard is clearly the "weak link" on the "slate of four."

Like Ken Gabbard, Nellie Cihon got no video time.

Why?

Because all she wanted to talk about was a trip she had made with a group that included the moderator of the candidates night, her granddaughter winning her volleyball match the day of the candidates night and other similar material.

She did obliquely make it clear she was offended the list of 10 Canal Fulton deficiencies put together by Eric Buwala, but she didn't grab anyone item off the list and respond like City Councilwoman Linda Zahirsky did.

The SCPR will not ask readers to take their precious time to what film that is not responsive/relevant to the discussion being held.

The Stark County Political Report does believe that Canal Fulton needs to take a fresh look at local governance and therefore recommends the "slate of four" with the exception that voters might want to replace Gabbard with Mayberry.

She could serve as a "swing" vote, if she can ever get her facts together.  The SCPR suspects she is "really" a better replacement for one of the incumbents because of her years connecting with them as a non-elected city administrator.

A concern that voters might have with the "slate of four" is whether or not they will fall into fighting among themselves.

Bagoucis, Buwala and Mouse are strong individual personalities.  Can they really work together to bring well-thought out and positive change to Canal Fulton.

The SCPR thinks so, but recognizes that it if The Report is wrong; then turbulence will be the order of things in Canal Fulton.

Canal Fulton stands at the crossroads of its future.  Citizens need to pay very close attention to these candidates and diligently attempt to "rightly divide" in coming to a conclusion as who to vote for.

Here is the SCPR edited video (the actual presentation of which went way too long to put the entire session on this blog) to help Canal Fulton voters make a wise choice.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

MAYOR HEALY WANTS YOU TO BELIEVE THAT OUTGOING SAFETY DIRECTOR NESBITT HAD ISSUES WITH CHIEF MCKIMM; MAYBE HE DID, BUT HEALY IS BEHIND THE CURTAIN


The Wizard of Oz (err - Canton) is at it again.

Yes, Mayor William J. Healy, even when he is out-of-town, leaves this mark on Canton. As reported in The Repository (Canton police chief reprimanded, July 15), Safety Director got the jump on Canton Chief of Police Dean L. McKimm and cited him with three reprimands on Wednesday.

But the SCPR does not buy that this is primary a Nesbitt/McKimm tete-a-tete despite being categorized as such (actually much stronger - harassment) by McKimm's attorney Craig Conley.

The McKimm disciplinary actions has Wizard (in his own mind) Healy written all over it.

Healy's modus operandi is to lurk in the background and have others do his dirty work for him. A person who works for Healy needs to wear a "back protector" not a "chest protector!"

The machinations:
  1. Nesbitt cites McKimm for insubordinate activities.
  2. Nesbitt schedules hearing on citations.
  3. McKimm ask for a public hearing.
  4. Nesbitt denies McKimm public hearing.
  5. McKimm goes to court to get public hearing.
  6. Nesbitt cancels hearing altogether and issues reprimands.
The last thing in the world that the Healy administration can abide is "the light of day."

McKimm through his attorney called the administration's bluff in terms of the administration trying to do its dirt "behind closed doors."

The Healy administration pre-emptive promulgation of reprimands were a face saving way out of an embarrassing situation for the Healyites (aka "the loyalists").

Now we have a situation where the chief deputy (Ream) is now going to be monitoring the chief when he assumes the safety directorship. On that count alone, the appointment was a dumb move.

But Healy, for all his chest-thumping about his own brilliance, keeps doing dumb thing after dumb thing after dumb thing.

No matter who he acts through (Price, Nesbitt [Ream] or whomever), when the curtain is pulled back "the light of day" reveals none other than the Wizard of Canton - Mayor William J. Healy, II.