Questions for Baxter

Matt Westerhold
Mar 23, 2010

Dear Kevin:

Thank you for agreeing to review and answer our questions about inaccuracies in the Murman statements attributed to you. We talked with a number of participants who were not interviewed by the Murman investigators, and, after reviewing your statement, the Murman report, the Nuesse response, the Darden report and other documentation, we compiled these questions for you.

Baxter statement

• “The U.S. Attorney, unaware of the chief’s failure to coordinate with local officials, cooperated to a point by opening investigations.” Were these DEA, or DEA-related cases? Please detail local cases on file with U.S. attorney since Aug. 1, 2006, and provide case and report numbers and any available documentation.

• Did the U.S. Marshal’s office invite all local law enforcement agencies to participate in Operation Falcon? Is this fugitive roundup a “wasteful and disruptive stunt,” as described in the Murman report? Which agencies chose to participate? Please explain.

• In your statement you say McClung and Nuesse “both wanted to disband the drug task force.” Did other police chiefs express similar thoughts or support for this position, or come to support this position? Please explain.

• Are there corrections to the statement timeline on task force tax initiative, election, support for drug task force, closed-door meetings, when officers were pulled from task force, etc.? Please explain.

• Murman statement indicates you complained that Nuesse “started taking many cases to the U.S. attorney.” Were these DEA-related cases? Please explain and provide details and reports of each case.

• Specifically, about the McGovern “child abuse” case: Were errors discovered in how the arrest warrant was issued, coded or otherwise created or errors with the warrant radius status? Where did these errors, if any, originate? The child’s mother reported the rapes in August. McGovern, a truck driver from California, eluded Huron police when they tried to question him. Federal marshals arrested McGovern in December after requesting the warrant radius be corrected. What, if anything, does this case have to do with the Nuesse probe? Please address concerns about timeline, problems with the warrant, and the sheriff office’s failure to attempt to serve it.

• Please provide information, details and reports of second rape suspect involving a (about) 13-year-old victim where charges were dropped in 2007 when the suspect was located about two years after warrant issued.

• In Murman statement you recall both the (1) U.S. attorney meeting and the (2) meeting with school officials as “educations” for Chief Nuesse. This point, others in your statement, and your general descriptions of these two meetings differ from recollections of the other meeting participants. Please explain.

• In Murman statement you said Nuesse “should have” brought any gang concerns to your attention. Is that required by statute? Please explain. Did she attempt to do this without success or feedback from your office? Was she referred to Barlyski and did Barlyski return her calls? Please explain.

• You describe Barylski as the local “gang expert.” Please provide documents and information on credentials related to her proficiency. Please also provide approximate number of cases, with case numbers, during the past five years that included gang specification charges.

• You state you had not “heard back” from Nuesse about the drug forfeiture fund. Didn’t the police chiefs, through the Firelands chiefs association, resolve this rather quickly with a framework for distribution prior to Nuesse’s suspension? Was it finalized shortly thereafter? Current status of drug forfeiture funds? Was it Chief Nuesse who pushed for distribution of these funds initially? Please explain.

• “Baxter was of the opinion Chief Nuesse, rarely, if ever got input from other city or county government officials before she acted and as a result she has made numerous questionable decisions.” Please provide detailed list of questionable Nuesse decisions, and any impact or potential impact these decisions had. Nuesse, and others, have said the department accomplished several outreach goals in the past two years, including improved relations with schools and school officials, local religious leaders and church members, other police chiefs, and state and federal law enforcement agencies in addition to minority groups. Have there been improvements along these lines, and, if so, how does that square with your statement?

Comments

Anonymous

Sandusky Register..when is the last time one of your employees got a DUI and you SR paid for them to take three days off not to mention paying for the DUI school? Why should the taxpayers have to pay to have some dispatcher who is in a probationary period pay for her misjudgement? What lesson did this teach the DUI offender...what would Nuesse have thought had the dispatcher gotten drunk the following week but this time killed someone? No questions asked...the dispatcher should have been fired immediately...that is why companies have probationary periods....

To the woman who wrote the letter to the editor in todays paper...don't group all women together their are many of us that are glad she was fired..she is playing the gender card which I find dispicable.....

Anonymous

Obviously you didn't go to the Tim Russert of journalism school...HONESTLY & INTEGRITY..of which you have neither...

Anonymous

These things happen when the city doesn't have a policy manual for their employees. Conduct should be spelled out in the manual. Employees need to know what is tolerated and what isn't tolerated and what the consequences will be. Besides, the paid leave was approved by Mr. Kline as stated in the evidence presented in one of the investigative reports. Checks and balances were in place, just ignored or not questioned by the city manager. The city manager needs to pay more attention to what is crossing his desk as that is part of his reponsibility. Kline was at the time Nuesse's boss. Where was he when all this was going on; for that matter, where was personnel? There should be approval of paid leave from Chief Nuesse to personnel to Kline. Three signatures should have been on the paid leave approval.

Anonymous

You atr about as full of feces as a Christmas turkey.

reader

There you go again, Matt !

Another online poll with unsatisfactory answer options...... Hire a new chief from within or hire from outside?

Why not advertise the opening and hire the most qualified candidate, whether from inside or outside the department ?

Your polls remind me of the ones Rep. Gillmor used to mail out. No matter how you answered the questions, the responses could all be slanted to support a position you weren't totally comfortable with.

Anonymous

Westerhold THRIVES on making trouble.

Anonymous

I think the city could make a peace gesture on the replacement of the police chief and that is to hire from outside. To hire within is not taking care of the problem as it will still exist if you hire within. If the city wants any healing done, they need to seek another outsider if anyone will take on these eleven supervisors and their hatred for an outsider.

Anonymous

ENOUGH ALREADY YOU ARE ALOSER AND A BUM AND I HOPE SOMEDAY BAXTER GET S YOUR AXX IN COURT!

Anonymous

I hope so too :)

Anonymous

Hey, know what? That "Turkey" your talking about must have fallen off your own platter. Yeah, you got all the answers. You must have been working at the PD too? Thats the only thing that could possibly qualify you to say this officer's opinion is so "full" as you put it. If you haven't been there, don't act as though you have.

Anonymous

Yes, I am an SPD Officer so don't get on your high horse and think you know everything. I know the Officer that wrote this and believe me he is full of it. As for yourself, go get bent, you don't have a clue. Write about something you do know like your ABC's.

Anonymous

Can't you just feel the LLLOOOVE in these blogs?

Taxpayer

This controversey will not end soon. If you feel Nuesse will NOT get anything by filing a discriminatory civil suit in FEDERAL district court, you are ALL out of your minds. It does not matter if YOU think she was competent or not, be prepared to PAY. The new SPD chief MUST be from the outside with the entire support of city council. Someone must place SPD under the certification process so a SOP manuel (Not FOP) will give guidance to ALL members. But, the command staff will only do what it knows best. They will sabotage anyone that tries to take away their power and commits to changing things. They have proven they will skip the chain of command and manipulate politicans. The new chief must promote good people and place the cancer in meanial jobs. The reason why the public is against LE officers is because of their lack of professionalism. The people do NOT serve the police, the SPD is supposed to Protect and Serve. They have the first part right, but the second part needs a plethora of work.

Anonymous

Well, we need to talk about this. Maybe I misunderstood the original entry of SPD Officer. If not, I'll be in @ 6 AM-See you there.

Taxpayer

You are WAY OFF! She won't get a dime, she won't get her job back. After we wait to see what happens in the 6-10 years it takes to see the judge maybe we can talk then. :)

Anonymous

are correct why isn't a--hole Baxter answering any questions? He acts like he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and is taking the 5th.

Anonymous

?? I don't think there is a need for Baxter to answer anything is there? She worked for the city manager, the city manager fired her. Seems pretty simple to me.

Anonymous

Pretty darn good with that name calling aren't you supporter's? Sure makes her look ALOT better with supporter's like you now doesn't it. Tells alot about the company she keeps.

Anonymous

You all need to get a grip. Baxter will not answer. Kim will prevail in a lawsuit. She more than likely wont get her job back. Your stupidity and name calling will not change. Matt will continue to do his job, and yes he does his job. He does it well enough he keeps all of you reading and arguing. You're not going to stop reading no matter how much you threaten or cry. People will continue to take sides in this and every other matter posted. Black hearted stupidity will keep you posting vile statements to families in pain, because this cloak of annonimmity give you gonads. And life will go on. Chat soon.......:-)

Anonymous

To WHY HASN'T WESTERHOLD>>> Kevin does have questions to answer, regardless of who her boss may have been, because he played a part in her ultimate downfall. He does not seem to want to call in the AG to conduct an accurate and unbias investigation. Why? We are a community on the edge and we are not acting very well and this situation has too many unanswered questions to be ignored. period.

Anonymous

He is a newspaper reporter, you dummy. Baxter isn't answering any questions because he is scared to say anything. Might get his gonads crushed or at least tightened in the vise.

Anonymous

will come when there's criminal activity not when there's a minor employment problem. So don't hold your breath on that one.

Anonymous

Baxter has got to be getting worried about people calling him out on his crap lately.

Anonymous

Administrative Misconduct, Abuse of Power and Evidentiary Misrepresentation ARE CRIMES DOOFUS!!

Anonymous

Geez Matt- I cant stand Baxter but these questions clearly look like you and Kim had a GREAT time sitting down and thinking these ones up! These questions sound like something SHE and BAILEY would like to ask him, and as always are using YOU as their PUPPET!

Anonymous

Cancel the SR? Absolutely no way. Because of Matt Westerhold and the SR staff, I just became a regular subscriber again! YOUR DOING FANTASTIC, MATT!!!!!!!!

Anonymous

I don't THINK something SMELLS rotton in Baxter's office, I KNOW something does and the corruption is not only there. It's time ALL these despicable corrupt individuals are exposed, forced to step down and GET OUT.

Anonymous

Why don't you post a GIANT photo of Baxter like you did for Tommy Ferrel?

Anonymous

Is it my imagination or does this case against the fired Police Chief Kim Nuesse sound a lot like the former Judge Ann Maschari's case? Looks to me like the good 'ole dishonest boys club got a tad bit overconfident.

Anonymous

Baxter is just a conduit to what the Sandusky commission is asking him to do. He needs to do his duty and send the AG request on. How is it going to look for him to turn it down? Who is Baxter to turn this request down with his conflict? I would certainly look into this if he did turn it down because it wouldn't look good. If he is not doing anything wrong, what is the problem with allowing it to proceed unless he has something to hide.

Pages