The problem with “moving on” after Carrington
As a community, we are at a crossroads. Now that State's Attorney Julia Rietz has revealed her choice not to pursue criminal charges against Officer Norbits or Police Chief R.T. Finney for the shooting death of Kiwane Carrington, it won't be long before we are told that we should move on, that now is a time for healing — resolution even. I disagree. When a community sustains the kind of trauma ours did on October 9, 2009, and then is forced to re-experience that trauma with Rietz's announcement last Tuesday, it is unreasonable to expect that we immediately begin reconciling our losses. Not yet, anyway.
I'll point out here that the community that has been affected by Rietz's announcement is not confined to Mr. Carrington's neighborhood, or to people who identify with his racial or ethnic makeup. The community I refer to consists, at the very least, of those who have even a minimal investment in the C-U community. All of us suffered a loss when Kiwane was killed. And no, I don't just mean that all of us lost one of our own community members, although we did. I mean that those of us who see Carrington's death as being related to race and class have lost that much faith in our city and in our police department, and that loss has indefinitely had an effect on those who do not recognize any racial connection whatsoever by virtue of the ideological rift it has caused.
Those who see this as being a racially-motivated crime against a young black man will not be hard pressed to recite examples of widespread institutionalized racism ranging back through our town's long history (however, if you are, I'd strongly recommend listening to this Youth Media Workshop Presentation and reading about the Brady Smith case). This history of racial transgressions is itself a history of loss, one that reverberates in Rietz's decision, regardless of whether it was made in good faith.
The framework for this scenario is already embedded in our culture. Assuming police officers' actions were justified, the multi-jurisdictional task force's investigation was thorough and Rietz's decision was made based on the facts and not political factors, this situation still hearkens back to unresolved racial and social discord historically prevalent in our community. Those who hear the reverberations of this strife in Rietz's decision will respond with indignation and rage over what they see as a miscarriage of justice and those who do not hear it will react defensively or scornfully and the two sides will be divided. This social disconnect, this breakdown in our community, is what makes the prospect of "moving on" or "healing" impossible at this point.
Like a physical wound, we must address the infection before applying the bandage. Indeed, the temptation to move on in spite of our unhealed wounds, if acted upon, will have its consequences. In fact, we have seen these consequences before — they are printed on our maps. C-U is a balkanized, ghettoized community, demographically identifiable on either side of University Avenue, politically identifiable on either side of Wright Street and these physical divisions are as much a product of our thinking as they are its cause. This is to say that we are products of our environment as much as we are its creators, which means that these geographical and ideologically divisions are not natural, nor are they impossible to overcome.
Before we move on, we must be willing to engage with one another, to discuss our painful history instead of blindly moving past it with no lessons learned. By pushing these issues to the margins over time, we have made them a central issue in our struggle to truly unite as a community. In order to recover from the incredible trauma we as a community experienced in October, yesterday and throughout our history, the last thing we should do is mute our anger, our outrage and our confusion. Now is the time for us, as a community, to communicate with one another openly and honestly. Now is the time to not move on, for once. Then the healing can start.
———————
To read an article that deals with some specific inconsistencies in Rietz's report, click here
34 comments
Thanks for writing this. It is indeed a crossroads. Although today’s News-Gazette editorial does state that the “fatal shooting (was) not justified,” Sunday’s op-ed piece by a freelance writer seemed the promote the overall “isn’t it awful, so sad, let’s get over it” way of thinking. We should not be ready to move on.
Amen.
mel
Like I wrote to the News-Gazette after the shootings [which was not published, btw]:
teenager + fear [NOT=] policeman + gun
The shooting was a travesty of justice.
L
Thank you for this. I work with youth from the community who represent eight different high schools in a 30 mile radius. It breaks my heart to hear them discuss the fear and hatred they feel toward their community and their law enforcement officials. I moved to CU in 2008, and these teens are the ones who told me where I should live and where I can and cannot travel alone at night. I was so surprised to see that fourteen year olds have a very distinct understanding of the racism and classism that occurs in this community and feel helpless to do anything about it. Reitz’s announcement is heart-breaking on so many levels, and brought many of these youth to tears. How is a mentor supposed to answer an 8th grader when he asks, “How can I make sure I don’t get shot outside my house?”
VF
This is a really sensitive and much needed piece, thanks. Sadly I have seen this scenario play out over and over again in this community and across the country. Most people always want to move on instead of dealing with these issues so they get swept under the rug until the next one—which there will be. I wish there was a forum provided. I wish the leadership of the city would realize how serious this is and bring people together to get real about it. But they will not. However, there are strong minded individuals in this community that are NOT going to let this die easily. Like the John Lee Johnson school initiative that really made the school district deal with what they were and were not doing, community members will continue to push for police oversight and proposed lawsuits will bring accountablity where Reitz decision will not. And because of this, there will be some progress. Those who want justice will pursue justice, but it will not bring back the life of a young boy whose only “crime” was, confused and scared, refusing to go along with commands when he was trying to get into his “auntie’s” house.
Local Yocal
Caleb,
Well done. You clearly get it.
Some things you can do for those that care this week:
Call 356-9397 between 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. The Chief of Police R.T. Finney and City Manager Steve Carter will be on the radio to take your call, and answer your question.
Friday, Race Manager Jerome Chambers, playing the role of a reincarnated house negro will attempt to ask us all to “just move along”, and will be on the same radio station to take your call at the same number, same time. There is no screening for content. You can tell these “leaders” exactly what you think, answer the question you need answered.
As expected as the dishonesty has been by the police, it’s publicity department, and the News-Gazette; and the state’s attorney’s consistent MO of giving officers enormous leniency when they commit crimes (which is why we have rogue officers in this city); the most disheartening part has always been the community’s consistent cowtow fear- or indifference- or the blind faith in the idealistic concept of police work. We have come to this point because the community has been silent to police misconduct and training that escalates violence, lawyers crafting loopholes to allow anything.
I can’t stress enough that there are decent hardworking people on the police force, just trying to do the best they can, in the midst of many crazy situations they did not cause. But their reputations suffer when they too remain silent to the abuses their co-employees inflict on the populace.
When some officers abuse their authority or worse, lie when they abuse their authority- and the lawyers hide and abet these abuses, none of us are safe from whatever some officer decides he wants to do to somebody. The kids, the poor (with records usually), and the minorities feel this- they experience this, and they are left without much hope. Their reasoned paranoia goes unnoticed, never solved.
In a short while, the Champaign Police department will get its accredation this spring. Finney will be hailed with a new contract. Officer Norbits will work the beat, highly feared, always obeyed. Tasers will be given, and well-meaning council members will justify such a vote, thinking that if one of those goes off accidently, at least it won’t kill somebody. From now on, if you don’t obey an officer’s command, zap, 50,000 volts. And the state’s attorney’s will charge you with resisting after you bond out of jail.
On the day of the announcement of the exoneration, most of the community didn’t give a rip at City Hall, but rather partied about a basketball win over Vanderbilt.
Rogue officers, the highly digitized police system, and the highly policital legal system have carefully created a drug war, a “culture of compliance”, and an aggressive patrolling system to crush mainly poor people to maintain their jobs. Slaves are needed to fill the prisons, do the corportate bidding for no wages. No one knows the horrors of prison, no one knows the deceits of the courtroom, no one knows the violence police are capable of. Because rarely does it affect people that wax clever on this site, grooving on the music, smoking a little weed. Is anyone not a little annoyed here that of all the 1000 pages to determine what officers did, the State’s Attorney focused on some pot smoking that morning, and the petty b.s. a 15 year old kept doing over the years?
The main reason there began a coming together in the 60’s, was that the government drafted college students to Vietnam. That policy alone forced the well-to-do to face what the government was capable of in the wake of the peaceful assemblies to address these grievances. College kids experienced what the negroes suffered arguing for equal rights under the Constitution. How things have changed.
The War on Drugs has exploded our prison population and repealed most of our Bill of Rights, while police and lawyers have been careful to not let you all see it. So complacent, so stupid we’ve become, that George W. Bush was re-elected in 2004.
I don’t know if Kiwane’s age, his small size, his popularity, his common behavior that day of Oct. 9 can override the white paranoia which permits the militarization of the police departments. We do know policing in Illinois has been allowed to be hostile and lawless in the name of “officer safety”. Sadly, some of the crimes committed nowadays get more bizarre by the day, with guns and drugs, and the instant national media to make any psychotic act famous for a week. Kiwane gets killed trying to get out of the rain. 4 Seattle officers are mowed down sipping coffee.
One justifies the other, until some day, officers won’t leave the squad car, just shoot from the headlights, mail the license plate to the courthouse, and the fine will automatically be deducted from your bank account. Don’t bother with a trial, your infraction was already videotaped and sent to a storage file for the guilty. Such are the fantasies of some of the anonymous shaved heads who police us now.
“Stop or I’ll shoot.” began our Chief of Police’s investigation. Check out the mission statement of the Champaign Police Department on its website. You would be surprised. Forget about serving and protecting.
Like other police and court mishaps of recent years, we’ll talk it about for awhile, and then soon return to our busy little blackberries, and check out the new microbrewery.
As always, I hope I’m completely wrong about everything I’ve written. But flipping TV channels from the City Council meeting to the Vanderbilt game last night has me pessimistic there is enough people who really want our community to heal and demand better police work. An African American friend asked me, “How do we get the white community to care about the criminal justice system?” I still have no idea.
OK
Newsflash - IL is a super corrupt state where the politically connected protect each other - hell our biggest city is run by a mob boss with both former governors being convicts. Lets make sure we keep that race and class cannon fired in the right direction - thats the real way to fix this.
Matthew DeMarco
Eloquent and insightful.
Nothanks
If you’re not all too busy writing your “everyone is racist” letters and patting each other on the back for “getting it”, take some time to read Kiwane’s (you know, the timid, shy, victimized Kiwane) arrest record and history with authorities.
The kid was a self-professed gang member, thug wannabe and in his short 15 years he had already victimized several people, schools, and businesses. That’s right, he had victims.
While we all may feel sorry for him, we should also have some sympathy for his victims, and I’m 100% sure there were going to be future victims in his life. He may have been the person that was going to victimize you or a member of your family in the future. And more often than not, fellow members of the black community are victims of black crime but I won’t see mention of that here because then you can’t enter race into the equation. Does that make this not a tragic accident? No, of course not, but I’m getting a little tired of the “racist” cry. Kiwane was given plenty of chances and as the old saying goes, when you keep dealing with fire, you’re going to get burned.
And Local Yocal’s comment “As expected as the dishonesty has been by the police” irks me. What are those dishonest comments? The only comments I have seen that are dishonest are the changing stories of the homeowners and neighbor. And I guess we could also call dishonest any comments that were made about Kiwane being a “good kid” since I would say that those have definitely been proven to be false. Who could honestly call a person with his background “a good kid”? I also have heard several say “He was just 15, what threat could he be.” That is a very naive comment. 15-year-olds are obviously capable of tremendous harm. Come on people, get past the racism thing and stop “dumbing yourself down”. You know right from wrong. Support right, condemn wrong.
What makes it so easy for you to call a young man you don’t know anything about besides what you’ve read in the papers a “bad kid,” other than your choice to do so anonymously? As someone who has worked with at risk young people and juvenile offenders for the better part of this decade, I can tell you that a kid can make a series of irresponsible choices and still be fundamentally “good” — especially if he doesn’t have a functional support system. As a one time young person who committed crimes and was involved with the police, I can tell you first hand that “juvenile delinquents” can change.
You’re choice to blast a dead teenager anonymously while denying the existence of racism suggests a deep cowardice that isn’t very hard to identify in an historical context.
Thanks for reading.
Except the only thing that really matters for the State’s investigation is the 44 seconds during which Finney and Norbits approached the house and Norbits shot Carrington, not Carrington’s long list of delinquencies. The rest of his record is only (possibly) tangentially related in that the officers may have approached with more caution if they knew who they were approaching. And that is the most deference you can possibly give. Otherwise, to return to Carrington’s past transgressions is simply to justify his death. Either it was an accident or it wasn’t.
I didn’t run the investigation, but with the facts as released, I see no way of proving a criminal case. That is the matter at hand.
Other judgments about the state of race relations or how the government exercises its (at core, physically coercive) police power are well and good, but ultimately separate. To conflate the two as they relate to our reaction to the SA’s report is folly, whether by knee-jerk police or victim apologists.
Nothanks, you have declared (in your previous comment) racism in Champaign to be a product of the bad behavior of blacks. Is this part of the justification as well? We can play the blame game as far back as we want; I’ve never seen a human, race, or culture that wanted for bloody hands. Yet surely you can see that there are entrenched structures of political and economic power (beyond one group’s bad behavior) that have led to this point, one of which being victimization at the hands of a sometimes violent police force.
Signed,
Robert Hirschfeld
(oh yeah, my name’s over there to the left)
Caleb and Robert,
While normally I don’t care for anonymous postings - and have spoken out against it on this site in the past - I think it’s entirely understandable in the case of Nothanks.
Pretty much anyone who dares to suggest that racist police officers may not have been the main cause of this tragedy runs the risk of being called racist themselves, and that’s a very serious accusation to have attached to your name in this politically correct age.
Mark,
Your premise is a little hyperbolic, but in any case, I can understand why someone would want to veil their opinion in anonymity. I personally think its an act of petty cowardice which absolves them of all accountability thus unfairly putting them on the favorable side of manipulative power dynamic, but hey, that’s Nothanks’ choice, not mine. S/he and Yocal will just be taken less seriously than those of us not afraid to be associated with our opinions.
Now I wish that I hadn’t even mentioned it because: 1) I hadn’t yet seen Caleb’s comment when I first started writing, and 2) while internet anonymity is an interesting issue itself, enough for me to comment upon it, it’s only the most minor in what I meant to say.
And I don’t take anonymous posts any less seriously. In my not-insubstantial wanderings around the net, I think I take them too seriously.
Caleb,
I don’t think my premise is “hyperbolic” at
all. As someone who frequently voices socially conservative opinions myself in liberal contexts, I can tell you that it’s no fun and that you’re always running the risk of being told what a racist you are.
Being labelled racist - fairly or unfairly - can ruin your reputation and career.
I’m encouraged that you came out against Local Yocal posting anonymously as well. I was going to say something snotty about how you don’t seem concerned about his/her anonymity because the two of you are on the same side of the fence on this issue, but it turns out you are.
I see what you’re saying about posting anonymously being cowardly and I agree - that’s why I don’t do it myself. However, when someone posts anonymouosly it gives you the opportunity to see what they really believe. Maybe that’s good or bad, I don’t know.
Bad decisions were made by everyone involved in this incident. I used to work at a place where they would say that it wasn’t the first mistake that would get you killed, it was the seventh or eighth.
In my opinion, this event has the hallmarks of a cascade of errors that leads to a fatal outcome. I think that Kiwane would still be alive today if only:
1. Kiwane had been in school as required by school policy and state law.
2. He and his friend hadn’t been trying to gain access to a house that, while friendly to them, wasn’t their residence.
3. The neighbors hadn’t mistaken boys who were apparently regulars in the neighborhood for criminals.
4. The officers who responded were less quick to draw weapons than to ask questions of the suspects. This might be the trickiest of all the issues at play here. Balancing the need to protect law enforcement officers with a need to avoid unnecessary displays of force is a delicate task. Personally, I know I’d rather have the officers prepared for the worst and be able to holster their weapons when the situation is revealed to be no threat. It’s usually far easier to holster a weapon in a non-violent situation than it is to draw the weapon in a violent situation. Obviously in this instance the preparedness of the officers was a factor in the shooting.
5. Chief Finney had been in uniform rather than plainclothes. I can only speak to my own reactions, but I know that I’d be more likely to comply with orders given by an armed officer in uniform rather than a man in jeans and an Illini sweatshirt with a gun, regardless of how real the badge he’s holding might look. I’d be interested in seeing changes to the policies of the Champaign Police Department to restrict the activity of plainclothes officers when uniformed officers were available and nearby. The exact nature of Finney’s attire differs in Officer Norbits’ and Chief Finney’s statements.
6. Chief Finney chose his words more carefully than saying “Stop or I’ll shoot you.” This was probably not the best choice of words given the situation. Finney’s testimony states that he identified himself as police prior to yelling these words, but these are the only words attributed to him in Officer Norbits’ statement. Regardless of when they were said vague orders to stop followed by threats of violence coming from someone not in uniform may have only escalated the situation.
7. Kiwane and Jeshaun obeyed the orders given to them by police. Regardless of any questions caused by Chief Finney’s unofficial appearance, the presence of Officer Norbits in his full uniform should have alerted Kiwane and Jeshaun that this was an official police action and their compliance was not optional. Their failure to comply with police orders was a factor in this event.
8. Kiwane and Jeshaun did not engage in a physical confrontation with Officer Norbits and Chief Finney. Even if Kiwane and Jeshaun were not willing to lay down on the ground or otherwise follow instructions, their decision to approach and confront armed law enforcement officers was exceptionally poor. It elevated what had been a simple misunderstanding to the point of violence. Given the officers’ training and weapons, this was not an encounter that the youths had any chance of winning.
9. Officer Norbits did not lose his situational awareness at a crucial moment. I’m not sure if situational awareness is the proper term for it, but from reading his interviews it is clear that Officer Norbits is unsure as to how his weapon discharged. His weapon was revealed to be in good working order, so a failure of some type seems unlikely. Keeping a cool head in this sort of chaotic situation is something officers train for, however, it seems even a moment’s lapse can have fatal results.
I don’t know any of the people in question, and I don’t feel right in calling any of them racists or hoodlums or murderers or criminals. I’d like to believe the best of what I’ve heard about the people involved and hope this was series of unfortunate events. If some of the factors in this shooting were caused by bad public policies, these policies should be changed to prevent future incidents. If the public does not trust, respect, or believe that the police have their best interests in mind then there needs to be an effort made to help show that the police are on their side.
In closing, I’m grateful for the hard work and dedication of our local police departments. Their willingness to risk their lives to keep our community safe and enjoyable is an often thankless and difficult task. At the same time, I’m saddened by the loss of a young member of our community. Nobody should die over a simple misunderstanding like this. Hopefully the factors that led to this incident can be learned from and remedied to avoid similar situations in the future.
Local Yocal
Arguement ad hominem- is that what it’s called? NoThanks and Local Yocal don’t attach their identities to their comments, therefore their opinions are to be taken less seriously.
While I don’t know why NoThanks chooses to remain unknown, I know why I choose it. I don’t want the caliber of my ideas gauged by who you think I am or what I look like. Also, it’s never a safe idea to criticize police officers with guns and the ability to put you into jail based on a report they write, with only poor legal representation available. Having lived here for awhile, I have learned to be very afraid of the police. The rogue officers do read these blogs.
Much of what I write is theoretical sometimes, sometimes it’s factual. As I posted in my screed, (I’ll admit, the legal community’s hiding this Carrington travesty has me discouraged- but I don’t think “I called everybody a racist”.) I’m always hopeful to be wrong about everything I write.
NoThanks infers police have not been dishonest in their accounting of what happened on Oct. 9. He said, “What are those dishonest comments? The only comments I have seen that are dishonest are the changing stories of the homeowners and neighbor.”
As MarkLaughlin and I have discussed before, what accounts for most of all y’all’s perceptions of the facts: is the newspaper, the tv, and the radio. Those accounts (besides Caleb Curtiss and Joel Gillespie, and that pesky professor at the U of I, I think his name is Dolinar) have been assembled by paid journalists quoting or being provided information from police departments, the state’s attorney’s office, and the city government. (Not exactly disinterested parties in the outcome of the Carrington case, my opinion.)
Can we agree that what we are debating as the “facts” of Oct. 9, are those facts that come from those sources?
Can we agree that what the State’s Attorney decided was: Kiwane Carrington set into motion his own accidental death because the boy fought with police [state’s attorney’s report] or as Jason Zylka perceives, “approach and confront armed law enforcement officers”? Is that part of your understanding of what happened on Oct. 9?
Does Kiwane’s past of arrests and contacts with police and the juvenile justice system lead you to believe he likely fought with police?
Does the surviving youth’s past contacts with police and alleged membership in a gang, what the State’s Attorney calls “The North End Gorillas”, and that he is currently being charged with a felony of resisting arrest make him a less credible witness?
Now my point of asking those irritating questions is this:
Would it be fair to recount past instances where Finney or Norbits or the Champaign Police Department (or other local police departments since they were the investigators) or the State’s Attorney deliberately lied, broke the rules, hid information, or were violent in the past to say that what they claimed happened on Oct. 9 is not true?
Local Yocal
I forgot one more irritating question before the last real question to be answered,
Can we agree that the idea that Kiwane Carrington “fought” with police officers, comes from the reports of the police officers?
@LocalYocal:
I agree that we’re debating this issue based on, as you put it “facts”, provided by the the Champaign City Police as well as the independent report provided by the Illinois State Police regarding the incident. Given the situation, I think it’s the best available source of information for the rest of us to try to make sense of what happened. Granted, those who were present that day all have a stake in the perception of the outcome. We have yet to hear Jeshaun’s account of what happened that day. I think most people’s assumption is that his version of the events that transpired will be much different from the officers’ version. I’ll wait for his version of the story before casting doubt on the veracity of this report. Regardless of what he says there will be conspiracy theorists on both sides accusing the other of lying or saying that his testimony was coerced. Besides airing each individual’s personal bias, these allegations of dishonestly don’t really achieve anything without facts or evidence to back them up. Do you feel there is a more accurate or authoritative version of the events available? If you don’t trust this report, do you have any suggestions as to how a more reliable report could have been compiled? While it’s not perfect, I think the current system is about as good as we can hope for in balancing professional investigation with independent analysis of the situation.
I don’t agree that your version of Julia Reitz’s findings is accurate. From my reading of her statements she determined it was an accidental weapons discharge and didn’t warrant criminal charges. There’s nothing in her reports blaming Carrington for his own death.
I’m not going to speak to Kiwane’s police record or the records of the officers involved. If you want to pursue a character assassination of the people involved in this event, I’m sure you can find plenty of dirt on all of them. Human beings are flawed and make mistakes. I’m not going to pretend that anecdotal records give me a full perception of the individuals in question.
I agree that the idea that Kiwane “fought” with officers comes from the reports of the officers. At this point, there are three living people who were there that day. They are the only ones who know what happened. Only the two officers have provided their version of the events, so yes, it’s their accounts that provide this information. If you’re suggesting there was no altercation or resistance from Kiwane and that the officers are not being truthful, then I won’t argue with you about that. There’s no evidence to suggest this was a fabrication, and I think it’s futile to try to prove such a thing.
I would even question that Carrington “fought” during the incident. The report says he did not comply and “resisted” but did not throw punches or grab at the gun. Resist in the this sense could mean he remained standing, and Norbits tried to forcibly get him to the ground. That’s not really “fighting,” and I would guess if he really were fighting, Norbits would have said so. What Norbits said is that Carrington was reaching into his pocket. That’s not fighting either.
Another thing that contributed to the tragedy here is the METCAD operator increased the number of burglars from 2 to 3. The call came in as 2 burglars, but the METCAD operator told the police there were 3. Norbits said he was looking for the third one while dealing with Carrington. Certainly this was not intentional, but it does underscore how bad decisions can happen when dealing with faulty information.
@Danschreiber
Good point on the “fighting” vs “resisting” descripton. Chief Finney’s injuries from the incident led me to believe there was an altercation of some sort, but there is definitely a difference between resisting efforts to subdue and fighting back against those efforts.
I missed the METCAD suspect count error in my list above. That’s yet another contributing factor. Even if some of the ones i have listed prove to be the product of my own ignorance of police procedures or misunderstanding the situation, it seems clear there are a number of things that can be done differently to avoid similar situations.
Local Yocal
To Jason Zylka,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. You are a good writer and thinker, and I appreciate your honesty. I also thoroughly disagree with some of your claims.
I explain below:
1) You say, the report is partly based on an “...independent report provided by the Illinois State Police regarding the incident.”
No sir. There is nothing “independent” about the local Pesotum, District 5 State Police Department. They graduate from the same schools (Police Training Institute), attend the same training sessions, shoot at the same firing range, and work on many of the same cases as does the Champaign Police officers. Listening to the interviews of the officers over the Oct. 9 incident, the result of this “working relationship” with the CPD was bias and leading questions that were not suggestive of any independence. Worse, the investigation was not entirely handled by the boys from Pesotum. Also remember, there was this bizarre creation of a “Multi-jurisdictional Investigation Team” assigned to assist the State Police investigators. It was this team that were the first to investigate the shooting druing the first days after the incident. Who are the “Mult-jurisdictions”? Rantoul police officers, University of Illinois police officers, County Sheriff deputies, and Urbana police officers. For the same reasons cited above, with the exception that these jurisdictions also serve on the same SWAT teams with Champaign police officers and work on more criminal cases with Champaign Police officers than does the IL ST. Police, there was no independence from the CPD. Finney and Norbits were possibly investigated into by personal friends, known colleagues, and fellow students.
2) You say, “Do you feel there is a more accurate or authoritative version of the events available? If you don’t trust this report, do you have any suggestions as to how a more reliable report could have been compiled?” I don’t disagree with those questions, and think them spectacular. I would suggest the first thing that could have been done was to investigate the WHOLE DAY of Oct. 9. I refer you to the Tuesday Oct. 13 News-Gazette article about this incident, B-SECTION!
3) You say, “There’s nothing in her reports blaming Carrington for his own death.” Setting aside what could be the purpose of all the background criminal history on Carrington, her use of the word “fight” twice in her last few paragraphs of the report, I agree with you that the report does not clearly state that. I was getting her recent radio appearance on WDWS confused with the report. If you go to the WDWS website, click “more WDWS podcasts”, click on “more Penny For Your Thoughts podcasts” found underneath their latest posting of a Penny For Your Thoughts show, and click onto the Penny For Your Thoughts show from December 9(?) and download her interview with Jim Turpin, Rietz summarizes the Carrington case at the very end of the show with blaming Carrington for his own death. She did this verbally on the radio, not in her report as you noted.
4)You say, “I think most people’s assumption is that his version of the events that transpired will be much different from the officers’ version. I’ll wait for his version of the story before casting doubt on the veracity of this report.” His version of events has already been discredited by Rietz’ digging into his MySpace page, his criminal history, and her charging him with a juvenile felony of resisting based on the accepted testimony from the subjects of the State Police investigation, 4 days after the incident, and 29 days before the completion of the Illinois State Police investigation. I wish the state’s attorney would have been as considerate as you to wait for either his version of events or at least until she had the entire report before deciding what happened that day. Have you ever heard of such a conspiracy? The person to decide if the officers did anything criminal, files a criminal charge against the only witness to officer’s behavior, solely on the testimony of the officers before the investigaton into events has been completed? Maybe that’s not a conspiracy. What is it then? A little mistake? I don’t understand why the public was told to wait until the investigation is finished before indicting the officers when nobody waited to indict the only civilian witness.
5) You say, “I’m not going to speak to Kiwane’s police record or the records of the officers involved.” Then why do you suppose the State’s Attorney did? You add “I’m not going to pretend that anecdotal records give me a full perception of the individuals in question.” I vote right now Jason Zylka for State’s Attorney in 2012. He’s got more ethics than she does. Can you think of any reason why Rietz would not mention Norbits’ involvement in the Greg Brown death in 2000? Listen to the download of the WDWS appearance. Rietz tries to explain. And then falls into the same trap she did with this report, a character assassination of Greg Brown to justify his killing by police. She gets called to the carpet by a relative of Greg Brown during the show.
6) You say, “If you want to pursue a character assassination of the people involved in this event, I’m sure you can find plenty of dirt on all of them.” While it’s true I can go back to some old criminal cases and show you how the people involved did some dastardly and dishonest things, I wasn’t ever going to assassinate anyone’s character. That would be playing their game. Like many other alarmed citizens, the report focusing so much attention on the past acts of the 4 people involved (except Finney, odd.) does little to account for what happened that day of Oct. 9. I’m infering from your response that your answer is NO to my original question whether it would be fair to bring in past instances of dishonesty to say what police claim is not true.
What’s happening here is as exactly as you say, “At this point, there are three living people who were there that day. They are the only ones who know what happened. Only the two officers have provided their version of the events, so yes, it’s their accounts that provide this information.”
What the State’s Attorney is doing, as juries are required to do, is gauge who’s more likely to be telling the truth of what happened. Who can I believe to recount events accurately?: A “North End Gorilla” or a police officer with many commendations in his record? It might be relevant, or it might not be; but since it’s down to the word of the parties involved as to what happened, we share Rietz’ burden of having to figure this out. It’s interesting Rietz in her report spends much time going back to the testimony of the homeowner and the reporting party to note discrepencies between there statements to investigators. Rietz points out that these discrepencies make their later testimonies “less credible”.
Why can’t we analyze testimony of the officers the same way and see if their story holds up? And if there are discrepencies in their verbage, would we be willing to hold officers to the same standard? Rietz chooses not to question officers like she did the civilian witnesses.
For example, here’s one: Finney told investigators the first thing he did was order the youth to the ground. Listen to what he says in his interview. He ordered the youth to the ground. That’s what he told investigators repeatedly. But wait. What Finney didn’t know during the incident was Dan Norbits’ position behind him- how far or close Norbits was on the driveway. Finney couldn’t see Norbits at first. Finney didn’t know Norbits could hear what Finney was saying when he ordered the youth to the ground.
So what does Finney tell investigators? I ordered the youth to the ground.
NOPE. “Stop or I’ll shoot you,” is what Finney told the youth first thing coming around the corner.
Maybe Finney couldn’t remember exactly what he said when he was talking to investigators.
NOPE. When Finney is questioned by Patrick Pfingston on WDWS the day of the release of the report, Finney offers an explanation: “I might have said, “Don’t make me shoot you. That’s what I said, ‘Don’t make me shoot you’.” Again, carefully suggesting the boys were that threatening.
(So which is it “Stop or I’ll shoot you.” or what Finney claims, “Don’t make me shoot you”? You boys mind getting up on the polygraph machine please, to go over this small detail, thanks. It’s important because Finney is trying to conceal who is the real aggressor.)
And then Finney cooly explains to reporter Pfingston that it’s a departmental policy that whenever officers display a weapon at a citizen, an officer should warn a citizen that the officer will actually use it. Oh, it’s another one of those departmental policies. Good memory for the rules, Chief.
Then why didn’t you tell investigators you said, “Stop or I’ll shoot you”, mother f——-!?
7) And that last nasty expletive there brings us to your last very, very wrong point Jason Zylka: “There’s no evidence to suggest this was a fabrication, and I think it’s futile to try to prove such a thing.”
Dude, wake up. Now. Parts of this community are really hurting over the loss of Kiwane. They are getting very tired of this type of policing. And some are getting very angry.
Going back to your earlier heartfelt sentiments which I share, “I’m grateful for the hard work and dedication of our local police departments. Their willingness to risk their lives to keep our community safe and enjoyable is an often thankless and difficult task. At the same time, I’m saddened by the loss of a young member of our community. Nobody should die over a simple misunderstanding like this. Hopefully the factors that led to this incident can be learned from and remedied to avoid similar situations in the future.”
We gotta get to the bottom of this for the good officers on the force just as much as for the grieving family who are being lied to by cowboy idiots like Finney, who need to be looking for other employment; and cherry-picking lawyers like Rietz trying to save the city some money.
Norbits is about the only real honest guy in this report. He admitted it was an accident. He’s opened the city up to a massive lawsuit with that statement. But he was following the racist perceptions of his Chief, his police training to be that god damn reckless and in a hurry, and the stupid METCAD information that can’t understand what blacks say on the phone.
I don’t know how he can’t remember applying the necessary 5 pounds of pressure on the trigger with his finger, but Norbits sounds like the kind of guy who may be willing to analyze that further with the rest of the community. I’m sure he’s getting tired of the violence himself, and doesn’t look forward to patrolling the north end anytime soon.
And now we got some well-intentioned bangers out there who don’t trust the official process to hold the guilty parties accountable. And who can blame them? They know what Brady Smith was allowed to do, and they know what didn’t happen when Brady Smith was caught. And the same State’s Attorney who gave Smith a pass, wants to send them to prison for decades selling a little rock to willing customers, huh? It’s not about race or class, huh?
However, and like Cowboy Finney is prone to do, taking justice into your own hands, (really Chief? death penalty for pulling on a door? Another secret departmental policy we don’t know about?)is a bad idea.
Maybe that’s why He said, “Vengeance is Mine.” and definitely not ours- since we are that stupid to elect George Bush a second time.
There are many talented people, like yourself Jason, who are trying to be as careful with the truth as you are, working to study what the heck happened, how can this be prevented. For those reading in Mahomet, rest assured we also are plannng teaching personal responsibilty for the unruly youth, as well.
We meet at the Urbana Post Office every Saturday at 4:00 p.m. We could use your kind of help.
P.S. Dan Schreiber, I don’t suppose you got time to build another web site do you? It’s people like Dan, who keep children safe from State’s Attorneys fooling honest guys like Jason Zylka into thinking this rotten report is “the best available source of information for the rest of us to try to make sense of what happened”.
@Local yocal
Thank you for your kind words. I’m glad we’re able to keep this discussion relatively cordial despite our varying viewpoints. I’ll respond to your statements point by point to help keep my thoughts organized.
1. Reading the transcripts of the interviews I was unable to detect any bias. The nature of the questions asked of the officers and the civilians were about the same. Granted, I’m sure the nature of the questions and the environment was probably far different than it would be for someone suspected of a crime, but I’m not sure if that’s what you’re referring to. I hope you can understand that two informed and rational people can look at a scenario and come away with equally valid yet different perceptions.
Unfortunately situations such as this investigation require both impartiality and a quick response. Balancing these two factors in a relatively small community is a difficult thing to do. Would bringing in investigators from outside of the district be an acceptable alternative? If so, how far from this district would we have to travel? If they came from an adjacent district is that too close? What sort of time delay would bringing in an outside team require? Would a week’s delay give the officers in question too much time to align their stories or provide too much time for the details of the incident to fade or allow evidence to decay? How much time are you willing to sacrifice in the interest of providing the appearance of a more independent investigation? I know there are those who believe that there are no circumstances where one law enforcement officer can investigate another law enforcement officer with impartiality. Regardless of how thorough an investigation is some people will always find fault with it. It’s far from a perfect system, but are there any viable alternatives? If you have issues with the composition of the investigative team this is an area where concerned members of the community may be able to make a difference in departmental policy.
As far as I know, every officer in the state of Illinois attends the Police Training Institute here in Champaign. If simply receiving their orientation at the Police Training Institute disqualifies someone from investigating a fellow officer, then we’re already discussing bringing in out of state officers for any investigation.
I have no knowledge of how and under what circumstances local officers interact. I’m not going to make assumptions regarding the personal or professional relationships without that information at my disposal. If it turns out that Officer Norbits only operates within Champaign and doesn’t serve on any inter-departmental bodies, does that make the investigation more valid? You bring up a valid point that the familiarity may create bias, but I’m not going to leap to that conclusion based on assumptions alone. In every workplace there are people who like each other, and there are also people who dislike each other. Does that mean that it’s equally possible there may have been people on this investigation who have a vendetta against Officer Norbits?
2. I’m not going to be able to run to the library to read the coverage you cite today. If I find time to go read that, I’ll be sure to comment on it. I agree that a more thorough analysis of the factors that may have led to the incident would provide more insight.
3. I’m not sure if Reitz’s radio comments are her own personal opinions or her professional opinions as a prosecutor. Obviously, she shied away from making such statements in her official report, which I consider her professional opinion on the matter. Whether she was trying to summarize her findings or whether she was expressing a personal opinion on the situation, I consider the radio interview to be a more informal means of discussing the investigation.
4. Your assumption here is that he is going to contradict the officers’ reports. At this point for all we know, he could say “I hate cops so when I saw one I charged at him” or “We complied with all of their demands and then they shot my friend”. I think both statements are equally unlikely, but at this point we really don’t know where his testimony is going to fall. Is it possible that he’s going to say that he and his friend panicked and tried to leave at which point there was physical interaction with the officers? That would seem to be both an understandable response from scared teens as well as an explanation of why the physical interaction started. I really wish that he had participated in the investigation so we could have the full story, but I’m sure that at his lawyer’s advice he declined to comment. As it stands, we don’t know if the State’s Attorney would want to discredit his testimony or not. For whatever reason, she decided his criminal history was relevant to the investigation of that day’s incident. Regardless of his history, if the events of the day are accurate as depicted in the report, I can understand the charges leveled against him.
I see the resisting arrest charge and the shooting investigation as separate incidents. I don’t think there is any question that the officers had a legal right to detain and question the two youths. Even if Officer Norbits was found guilty, that doesn’t change the possibility that the youths were resisting the officers. The two charges can coexist without conflict. It’s a far simpler task to determine if there is sufficient evidence of resisting arrest than whether there was a wrongful shooting, hence the immediate charges for one and a lengthy investigation for the other.
It’s unfortunate that the officers’ word alone is sufficient to bring charges. However, this is always the case in nearly every situation. It’s simply one of the truths of our modern legal system. Without overwhelming evidence to the contrary, an officer’s word will win over a civilian’s word every time. Whether you’re dealing with assault or a traffic violation, in a court of law if the officer says you did and you say you didn’t, you’re going to be found guilty unless you have evidence to back up your point. This can be unfair, but I also feel it’s necessary for the functioning of our society so that when you’re dealing with actual “bad guys” the police are able to convict them without an unrealistic burden of proof. Does this open the door to potential violations? Of course it does, but our police departments would be nearly toothless without it.
5. I’m not running for political office any time soon, but thank you for your endorsement. In my own uneducated opinion, the report should focus on the events of the day and little else. Determining whether the shooting was accidental or not is unrelated to the past. The question is did the interaction between the youths and the officers merit a use of force and, if so, was this use of force done with criminal intent or criminal negligence?
6. As stated above, I’d prefer not to let previous situations influence the interpretation of the events of the day. If you find evidence that both the officers have lied in the past and that the youths have lied in the past, then where does that leave you? If it was the case of pathological lying or someone with a long and well documented history or making false statements, that might be cause for alarm, but I don’t think that’s the situation here.
In terms of credibility, I’m going to go back to what I said in point 4. The officer’s word is always going to be assumed to be more credible than the suspect’s. Whether it’s a “North End Gorilla” or a distinguished professor at the University, the officer’s word will be taken as the truth if there is a discrepancy in their recollection of the events.
I’m not sure why the investigators sought multiple interviews with some people and only one with others. That would be an excellent question to ask those who conducted the investigation.
I agree that there are discrepancies in the reports of the two officers involved. However, most of what I’ve seen is relatively benign. I’ve noted differences in the accounts of Chief Finney’s attire, and differences in the accounts of what he said that day. Will either of these things dramatically alter the outcome of the investigation? My opinion is no, and I also don’t think that the discrepancies are indicators of a greater deception at work. The differing details provided seem to me to be simply differing recollections or perceptions or due to being out of earshot at the time. Getting to the bottom of these discrepancies may help to determine some of the factors that led to the shooting, but I don’t think it’s going to reverse Reitz’s findings.
7. The statement that you’re quoting from me in this point was referring to the occurrence of a physical interaction between the officers and the youths. Chief Finney’s injuries are sufficient evidence, for me at least, that there was some sort of interaction, scuffle, or altercation during this incident. If you think the account of this physical interaction is a fabrication then I’m not going to argue with you. The alternative is that Kiwane was shot from a distance for no apparent reason. You say that Norbits is an “honest guy”, but do you doubt that he was physically interacting with Kiwane at the time of the shooting, as he states in his testimony?
What type of policing are people getting tired of? The type that ends up with an unarmed teenager being shot? I’m pretty sure that everyone in this community is tired of that type of policing.
I find the name calling and baseless accusations you throw about in the rest of this point distasteful. I think it discredits you and your other viewpoints, which is unfortunate because you make some valid and interesting points.
If you’ve got details about a community activism group focusing on these sorts of issues, you may want to let the writers at Smile Politely know. I’m sure there’s enough interest in the community to warrant an article on them.
I take umbrage at the suggestion that I need Smile Politely to protect me from the machinations of the State’s Attorney or anyone else. I’m wide awake and I’m fully capable of reaching my own conclusions based on the information in front of me. I appreciate that Smile Politely serves to inform and as a forum for us to discuss our local issues, but I’m not being fooled by anyone. I may have a different perception of the situation than you, but that’s not because one of us “gets it” and the other does not.
I find it strange that despite any evidence to the contrary there are people who consider this report to be chock full of lies and misinformation. I have yet to see or hear of any convincing piece of evidence to show that the events of that day are significantly different than what is presented in the report. What is the source of this distrust? If it’s not based on evidence is it simply bias and a dislike of the local law enforcement? If you’re aware of any significant conflicting information, please share it with me. Granted, we’re still missing one individual’s take on the events of the day, but unless there are mounds of evidence yet to be revealed I can’t imagine my perception will change dramatically.
Local Yocal
To Jason Zylka,
You wrote, “I take umbrage at the suggestion that I need Smile Politely to protect me from the machinations of the State’s Attorney or anyone else. I’m wide awake and I’m fully capable of reaching my own conclusions based on the information in front of me. I appreciate that Smile Politely serves to inform and as a forum for us to discuss our local issues, but I’m not being fooled by anyone. I may have a different perception of the situation than you, but that’s not because one of us “gets it” and the other does not.”
Are you taking umbrage to my comment: “Wake up, Dude” in response to your earlier comment: “It’s futile to try to prove this case is a fabrication”? Okay, I read your comments in totality to mine, which you recognize has been somewhat critical of readers of this site, me imagining them to be a little distracted.
I know you are wide awake. That’s why I spent my time to respond to your posts even though we do disagree.
My apologies. Well, we have alot of intelligent differences on this one, and I think readers can see our points of view are at least reasoned, yours more than mine. I am emotionally upset police killed this young man. I don’t know how they did it, or why they did it, I hope for an honest mistake, a real accident. I’ve become aware some members of the CPD harbor a naked hostility toward minorities of the community. So when a case like this happens, we are suspicious, but not because we don’t like police or policework. There is a history in this community between the police and the north end. That history teaches us that have experienced or eyewitnessed this hostility by specific officers, see Kiwane’s killing as more than just an honest accident. It is a pattern of deliberate recklessness rooted in their perception of blacks and poor people. And if you go to the website, www.thebradysmithcase.com for one small example, or read up Dec. 2008 Detective Lisa Staples traffic case, you might see why we don’t trust lawyers and cops to be honest. You are right Jason, we have different perceptions with different data we are looking at.
My mistake was imagining I could convince you otherwise in a single writing. My arrogance, not yours. I appreciate your thoughts, as I believe you do mine. We probably should spend less time on the computer about this for now, until there is better clarity about this incident. Thanks for taking time to take me seriously. I hope anything I wrote can be seen more as personal perception about Kiwane’s death than accusations toward you and other readers. We are frustrated that this violence, “these accidents” keep happening to black males all over the country. If, as so many posters have chimed in with the same thought, that the “police” are a brutal part of the state’s desire for control, power, and oppression of people some don’t like- going all the way back to slavery, Jim Crow, and racial bigotry to this day- than we wish we could get back into solving these problems. Jason, I suggest you consider listening to a radio show “Higher Ground” on Saturday mornings at 9:00 a.m. on WEFT, especially when Aaron and Carol Ammons host the show. (it alternates hosts every week.)Or listen to WEFT on Sunday mornings at about 8:30 a.m. for Unity in The Community. Not to convince you of changing your mind, but rather to open your mind to how other people see and feel about this incident. And that is the “wake up dude” comment is about. People are hurting, as I think you are sensitive to. Good luck to you.
@Local Yocal
I wrote up a comment and thought I posted it a few days ago, but it appears to have gotten lost in the series of tubes somewhere. I’ll try to rehash it.
I don’t doubt there are bad police officers in town just as there are bad waitresses, garbagemen, and professors. It’s just that I believe, perhaps naively and perhaps only for my own peace of mind, that a majority of the officers are decent, honest, and professional.
I also don’t doubt that there is a history of problems with the north end. Unfortunately, I think this may be a positive feedback loop that only perpetuates itself. The memory of discrimination and mistreatment lasts for a long time in people’s memory. This memory creates a distrust of the police. This distrust creates additional tension when the police interact with the residents of that neighborhood. The additional tension leads to more arrests, more severe reactions, and harsher tactics. These in turn, lead to more distrust. I’m not sure how to break this cycle, but I’m sure there are plenty of organizations, studies, and activists out there who have worked on such a topic.
I empathize about the loss of Kiwane. I understand that losing anyone so young is difficult for those who knew him and that the circumstances make the loss even worse for the community. I hope that some posthumous meaning or benefit can be found to lessen the suffering.
Thank you for the tips on local community resources. I’m always interested in hearing other perspectives on the issues affecting our community. Good luck to you as well.
David Roknich
“Assuming police officers’ actions were justified, the multi-jurisdictional task force’s investigation was thorough and Rietz’s decision was made based on the facts and not political factors…”
This is a big assumption to make, and a lot is excluded when you try to address the situation without a truly independent investigation. It is only a very recent trend to completely seal a police report “pending investigation”.
At the whim of an offender, acting under color of law, a case will be kept secret until the staute of limitations runs out, and the victim has no recourse. I personally know of one instance where in spite of more than 2 dozen witness, and several policeman writing notes at the crime scene the police report was keep secret for more than 2 years, and then once obtained, it was BLANK. This could happen in your town, if it has not already.
The history of FInney and Rietz is already well known: they have been caught in lies before and served themselves under the color of law. Once again, failure to seek legal council in a timely manner to challenge the whitewash will be very costly, to say the least. Isn’t there a law school at the university?
David Roknich
Galesburg, Illinois
Ronna James
Caleb, this is my suggestion on how you and your friends can personally help to ‘de-ghettoize’ our community: Instead of expecting your neighbors to the north to do all the work of integrating and adjusting to areas south of University Avenue, you, your family members, and your friends can buy or rent houses in the ‘demographically identifiable’ area you described.
There are a number of really nice houses for sale on the 500 block of W. Beardsley, Champaign at reasonable prices. (I assume you know where Beardsley is). Or, I can probably find one or two houses for you to rent. I’m very serious about this. And I believe my dear friend and ‘partner’ (as he called me since 1966), John Lee Johnson, whose name was mentioned above, would agree. So, put your money where your mouth is. Your other alternative is easy…. just continue to talk in these venues or at city council meetings. But, will that actually change or enhance your life?
You know, it took majority privelege, intention, persistence and illegal steering of realtors in our community and across this country to keep the races separated. All the while, whites (even those with a penchant for social justice) did very little to interfere with their objective. So, now is your chance, Caleb. You can do something really meaningful that addresses your own stated concerns. But will you?
With the killing of this child an opportunity has presented itself. If you don’t have the personal resources to purchase a house, then think collectively…...think creatively. Remember, talk is cheap. Remember, if not you….who?
JP
I’ve really enjoyed reading this ongoing debate. Thank all of you for educating and enlightening me, as I had been content with the information spoon-fed to me by the News-Gazette.
Ronna—I like your challenge to those of us who are interested in social justice to put our money where our mouths are. It is so easy to talk the talk, but much harder to live out the reality of our beliefs.
Ronna,
You’re making a great deal of assumptions here. I appreciate your point (despite it being something of a straw man), but your tone suggests a general “gotcha attitude” that a. isn’t very constructive and b. doesn’t have me feeling too convicted.
Also, if it makes you feel any better, I’m pretty familiar with Beardsley. It was on my paper route when I was a kid.
Thanks for reading.
Ronna’s challenge begs a question. I’m thinking of a native friend who refers to white men as an invasive species (in jest, but still). Nobody is waiting around for you to show up and save them.
hey ronna
I want less corrupt police too. Can I send you my address? I wanna know if its okay with you.
I know what you mean though - things like the university’s “African American Homecoming,” are just prime examples of whites in power allowing the blacks to be seperate from them so the whites can really be on there own like deep down we know they want they have power in the community come together assumptions cultural differences positive approach right direction reach out understanding community.
RAC
Communitiaphen. Maybe Novartis could put a couple o’ hunnerd Lincolns’ in Obamas back pocket to get that covered in the Health Care bill. I’m sure Beverly wouldn’t mind - worth a little writers’ cramp.
Sam
This kid is dead because he was black. There is no way to justify that. The cop should not have pulled his gun on teenagers, this should not have been his automatic response. There has to be accountability for the police, they must be held to some discipline and punishment when they murder a teenager. This will not stop if they can not be punished. It is impossible to deny the racism in the police departments actions, this is not an isolated event. To blame a kid, for being a kid in his world where institutionalized racism reigns supreme, to put his death on his shoulders at all is just disgusting. I have no idea how someone could be so blind as not see how the media portrays black men, to not recognize the discrepancies in drug laws, to not see the demonization of a whole race of people. I just don’t understand how someone could at all think that this kid could have done anything at all to justify being murdered by the police. The racism in this town is so blatant, and the police are not here to serve and protect anyone. Has anyone ever witnessed what happens to a local black teen who happens to stumble upon campus? They are in cuffs in minutes, and bullied by an outrageous number of cops surrounding them. The white college kids just stand around and gape at it. There is a law school here that could be doing something to take this on, not unlike the Life After Innocence Project at Loyola, but there is not a student movement for justice, there is apathy in the community and the campus. Real change could happen here, the means are there, to make the police be held accountable for their actions, and to press charges against the police officer. If nothing happens, then nothing will change.
Most Recent Opinion Comments
hey, if hair ain’t gon’ be over your head, my jokes may as well be.
Okay, almost 24 hours later and I finally got Issac’s Summer joke. I’m an idiot.
Swap the dog for a fire pit and it sounds like you’re writing about my back yard. Very nice.
funny, as your summer begins, another Summer ends.
And that, my friend, is love. Bob, I think I still owe you for my wedding cake, served in 1998. But nevermind.
I believe the kiss between Rob and I was documented on low-quality videotape in the mid-ninties porn classic, Dirty Harry…and Sticky.
“Do I have to sign some forms, or am I just considered ‘in.’” You’re in!
Got damn, Coulter. You are the greatest.
I have no specific memory of it, but I wouldn’t be surprised if I’d kissed Mike, too—once we’d both drunk ourselves gay. And earlier this week I gave Clarence Shelley a back rub. Do I have to sign some forms, or am I just considered “in.”
Most Popular Opinion Articles (60 days)
- Feeling Hot, Hot, Hot!
- “Opposite” marriage includes fun, love, and drinking in the day
- I bet you wish you had a hat
- Politics and poker may or may not mix
- Priest suing N-G is part of Catholic splinter group
- Opening day brings drinks to the table
- Off the rails
- The desert
- A Modest-ish Proposal
- Double trouble in Coulter’s dog prison
Most Recent Comments
As a liberal conservative, and a person who favors taxes & services ... and also a sense of proportion; I savor the comic potential that still exists in this comments section. I’m pretty sure we can goad more anti-government rhetoric from confirmed progressives and government employees. If…
Did the Crave Truck get a permit to park in city metered spots and city right of way? Or did they just get a permit? The city clerk’s office seems to be a suspect here, but it’s not clear they did anything wrong. Did the Crave Truck…
High-profile whining. AKA Lobbying.
it’s quite choice. looking forward to seeing how it and its patronage grow and develop over the course of the year. could be a neat little ecosystem.
“It was at this point, before he started his business, that working with city employees should’ve raised red flags…” But they didn’t because: 1) The City Clerk’s office originally mis-interpreted the rules, or are indeed re-interpreting them. 2) Champaign’s brick-n-mortar merchants hadn’t yet started whining about The Crave Truck.
Super cool! Excellent track, Excellent band.
Looking forward to trying this place!
I’m in the middle (or the beginning or end, depending on how you look at it) of re-reading Slaughterhouse Five. What a great companion column.
Get yours early. The Rave’s CD will be available at Exile and at The C-U Flea on Saturday. C-U Flea details here: http://www.smilepolitely.com/news/sp_radio_podcast_c-u_flea_arrives/
I don’t know about Gerard and a random police sargeant. My (mild) outrage is based on this: “...he worked closely with Champaign City Clerk Marilyn Banks to make sure he was licensed properly as a transient food peddler, filling out the necessary paperwork and paying a $225…
Local Yocal pretty much nails it here. I suspect there will be merchants who oppose food trucks because they arguably don’t pay their fair share to locate their trucks in high traffic (high rent) areas. The food trucks take away business from rent payers, park in city…
Oh nice! I’d totally vote for Matt Campbell!
“Smile Politely sports writer announces candidacy for city government.”
I also got to visit Big Grove Tavern during the soft open and definitely enjoyed the pork belly the most of all the dishes I sampled. The cheesy grits and the vinegary pickled vegetables were a perfect compliment to the rich pork belly.
The Alan Partridge lookalike on the right in the first small photo has nothing to condescend to anyone about. AH HA!
Snell and the little Hitlers of the neighborhood association need to chill out. Legitimate businesses should have the freedom to exist without having to endure the slings and arrows of ignorant and misguided opposition.
represent, Matt.
Yeah, I’d agree that Transporter Room 3 is the worst house venue I’ve ever seen.
Food trucks are the start-up, small businesses of the future for those unable to afford real estate. No surprise, that merchants who pay rent, utilities, and maintenance on a property would despise the traveling competition. Or developers who build more empty retail spaces would want to close…
Not so much far-right Tea Party as a balanced, moderate viewpoint between letting businesses succeed and protecting society with reasonable regulations. In spite of what the city reps are saying, the interpretation of policy on this issue certainly has changed. Letting a business start up under one…
Facebook
Twitter
Full Site
I’m in the middle (or the beginning or end, depending on how you look at it) of re-reading Slaughterhouse Five. What a great companion column.