There is a back story to the news report I wrote last
week about claims that Macomb County Sheriff Tony Wickersham purged his
political foes from the Sheriff’s Department.
When I questioned him, Wickersham denied the accusations
and said the 25 or more reserve deputies who were booted shortly after the
November election were targeted due to poor performance, not because they
supported Greg Stone in the August primary.
One reserve who was brave enough to speak out was Ray
Selman of Macomb Township, who was dismissed from the ATV Unit. Selman
supported Stone – as a friend – then voted for Wickersham in November.
In my interview with the sheriff, I mentioned Selman’s
situation. Wickersham expressed doubts that Selman was let go without a compelling
reason. (Selman served 14 years in the military, now works at the VA, and
dedicates more than 160 volunteer hours a year to the reserve force, four times
the minimum required.)
About 15 minutes after the interview was over, Wickersham
called me and said I should ask Selman about “a missing person in Detroit.”
What does that mean? What’s this about? “Just ask him about a missing person in
Detroit,” he replied.
At that point, I thought Selman’s credibility as a source
for my story may be ruined. The implication was surely that the ex-reserve
officer had some kind of ties to a crime.
When I called Selman and asked what this was all about,
it turned out that Wickersham was heavy on the drama and short on the facts.
In late 2011, Selman answered the call when Detroit
police sought help from suburban cops to conduct a massive East Side sweep
to find a missing girl who authorities feared was dead. Selman volunteered and
showed up in his Macomb County reserve deputy uniform.
When his commanding officer found out what happened, he
warned Selman that he’s not allowed to wear the uniform except when on active
duty. Don’t do it again, he was told.
End of story.
It’s also worth noting that this slight blemish on Selman’s
record occurred in 2011. The letter sent to Selman informing him that his
services were no longer needed said the decision was based on a 2012 annual
review.
Wow talk about an abuse of power. This guy needs to be censured until a complete investigation can be conducted by a 3rd party.
ReplyDeleteWickersham's behavior is very much like a corrupt entitled good ole boy and very reminiscent of ex-Sheriff Hackel Sr., who learned the hard way that pride comes before the fall. He seems like an unprofessional hack who isn't very well educated and thinks he can play tough guy. He would be wise, however, not to follow in the footsteps of Hackel Sr.
ReplyDeleteYep, Keep digging Tony. Is that the best you can do? How did burying the truth for so long work out for Lance Armstrong?
ReplyDeleteLivestrong..................for now.
What kind of leader finds it appropriate to summarily dismiss long-serving volunteers without good reasons, then publicly implies they have shortcomings, but refuses to tell those same individuals (even privately) why he/she was dismissed? There is no good excuse for discarding dedicated, qualified people that are already trained, equipped, and active. It appears they have been identified and culled by a formula that only a few are privy to. More importantly why cut the reserve cadre by even a single man from amongst those who fulfill their reserve commitment without incident? Don't the citizens and taxpayers deserve the value added from having every single qualified reserve officer as a force multiplier for the county? The remaining officers who see what happened to comrades are shaking their heads and hoping it won't happen to them, but they are affected. What kind of environment has been created by such measures?
ReplyDeleteFinally, there is no way the Sheriff should or could conduct a proper annual review on over 250 reserve officers without unit commanders being part of the process. So why have some unit commanders been blindsided by the cuts? In another instance one unit commander tacitly agreed to dismissal of several highly regarded subordinates who were believed to be associated with another candidate during the primary. Yes, all reserve officers serve at the pleasure of the Sheriff but these actions are not consistent with a transparent government agency acting with integrity. Would it be worth noting that this second commander falls obscenely short of fulfilling his own reserve obligations but does have other $kill$ that proved beneficial to the incumbent?
Sheriff Wickersham....your actions and explanations don't pass the smell test and you know it!