LETTER TO THE EDITOR

What about the other officers?

It never ceases to amaze me about our government beliefs and their decisions. If folks cannot see the writing on the wall with the local sheriff incident, then they haven’t followed the politics of this county. I understand through the local TV stations and our local newspapers that the remaining 14 officers have never been named?

Why is that?

As a concerned resident and voter, I feel we have as much right as anyone to know who they are. Especially since we could lose 14 more officers. I am most certain many of the residents in Jefferson County are asking the same questions. We do not know the full story of the sheriff nor will we ever know. Does it really matter? I will also say that the personal incident that stems from 20-plus years ago didn’t matter then, so why does it matter now? Our past sheriff served as a police officer for years during that time, worked for the Department of Homeland Security then came back to Jefferson County to run for sheriff and won. He served in that position for four years then ran again for sheriff and the people of Jefferson County voted him in for a second term. Do you really think we cared about his personal life? Or what the correct way is to arrest a criminal? He served our county for many years and I am sure most of Jefferson County will focus on all the good he has accomplished. I appreciate a job well done. He is very well liked and will always be well liked. I hope the county commissioners make a very fair selection for our next sheriff. They sure have their plates full in selecting. The county is watching close.

Lora McKenzie

Charles Town

Editor’s note: As the Spirit reported in our May 30, 2012 issue, a lawsuit filed by Mark Daniel Haines initially designated Robert “Bobby” Shirley and 14 other then-unnamed officers as defendants. Haines subsequently reduced that number to nine, and released the names of the other officers, which we reported on Dec. 12, 2012. One of those nine others was subsequently dropped from the suit on assurances that he was not at the scene, as we reported on Jan. 9.

Share This Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>