Stierwalt should show respect

Register
Feb 27, 2014

 

Sandusky County sheriff's detective Sean O'Connell recently told the family of Isabel Cordle the county prosecutor would present new evidence to a grand jury the first week of March concerning the murder of Cordle on Jan. 24, 1988.

The word to the family came from O'Connell and not Sandusky County Prosecutor Tom Stierwalt, who has refused to return calls from family members. 
 
It's not the first time O'Connell has promised family members action. Since October, when the new evidence came to light, O'Connell has repeatedly told them Stierwalt would take it to a grand jury "next month," family members said. 
 
We hope he follows through on the latest promise to the family from O'Connell. It seems to us, also, the least Stierwalt can do is have the courtesy of returning calls from the family and to keep them aware of the status of the investigation. After all, the Cordle family has waited 26 years for some resolution. 
 
For her children, more than half their lives have been lived with the unwarranted suspicion cast upon them after the first investigation of Isable Cordle's death by Sandusky County all those years ago when detectives named Cordle's husband and son as suspects even though there wasn't any physical evidence to substantiate their involvement. 
 
It's time for Stierwalt and the Sandusky County Sheriff's Office to start showing some respect to the victims of crime, and to quit stalling. 

Comments

Jmschmidt812

It's you who should show some respect. You are completely disrespectful to those in uniform at the SCSO that had nothing to do with any of the stories you have covered. You lump the whole office into a catagory that is less than pleasant. There are plenty of outstanding officers in that organization that you tarnish whenever you refer to the SCSO. So before you demand respect you should show some to the ones that deserve it.

sandtown born a...

One bad apple spoils the bunch! I feel for the good quality officers who seem to be lumped in with the totally incompetent, corrupt idiots who seem to make up the guidelines along the way. I'm sure there are some quality law enforcement officials in SC unfortunately the actions of the bad seem to drag down the reat

Jmschmidt812

Agreed.

Peninsula Pundit

So why don't these 'upstanding' officers, paragons of their trade, stand up and out the miscreants amongst them?
Maybe that 'thin blue line' is more important than their integrity?
Actions speak louder than words.
Honorable is as honorable does.
One bad apple does spoil the whole bunch.

Jmschmidt812

Some of these people have families to feed and bills to pay. Why would they jeopardize that with no knowledge of any wrongdoing. They weren't there nor do they have first hand knowledge of anything illegal.

Carlos Danger

I'm curious as to who reached out to TNT to have them do a show which apparently resulted in new evidence.  I do believe that Detective O'Connell and the Sheriff's office deserves a lot of credit for reopening this 25 year old case and cooperating fully with TNT and following up on the new information developed.  I'm not surprised though that the Register fails to publicly recognize this, but instead publishes another opinion piece showing its negative bias.

jacksonbrowne

With no disrespect to Det. O'Connell but he should only tell the family that the evidence is now in the hands of the Prosecutor's Office and stop promising them things will happen. Once this info leaves his hands it is no longer his responsibility and could be offering false hope. Let the Prosecutor's Office take the heat for not doing their jobs.

Peninsula Pundit

You may count this as the one sensible post you made this week.
Feel free to revert to your normal M.O.now.

Carlos Danger

Jackson, I'd be willing to bet that's exactly what Detective O'Connell did. Then you add the family's interpretation of what he said, added to the interpretation of the reporter they talked to, then add the biased interpretation by the Managing Editor, and it ends up being called a broken "promise" to the family in the article.

Matt Westerhold

Or maybe Carlos, just maybe, you have a vested interest in this in some way that makes you blind to the information being presented and angry that it is being presented. I think that might be causing you, and Jmschmidt, to find an excuse for every inconsitency in process that's been reported. You both always seem to explain away questionable police work by blaming reporters, editors, the newspaper, or blaming the Burdines, the Jones and Limberios families, blaming their attorneys, the Justice for Jake Group, the 20,000 followers of J4JE, or blaming Dr. Phil, Dr. Wecht or Dr. Baden, or in this instance, blaming a family falsely accused by the Sheriff's Office and forced to live for 26 years with the horrible suspiscion a family member killed Isabel Cordle. As it turns out, Sheriff's detectives  got it wrong in 1988 when they walked away whistling a happy song withou finding a killer, or clearing the Cordles. 

The Sheriff's Office went show business in 2013, and was set to walk away again, as the 'Cold Justice" episode concluded, leaving the Cordle family in suspended animation under suspiscion for the rest of their lives by naming a family member as the last remaining suspect. That's how the program concluded, Carlos, and it was all show business. 

It was the family's humble call for relief, Carlos, and an advocate's assistance to them, that forced Stierwalt to allegedly, and again, agree to bring this "new" evidence to a grand jury, not TNT, or those show business detectives or O'Connell and Stierwalt, or the sheriff. I'm almost sure you've never talked to any members of the Cordle family, or the advocate who helped them, or anyone else cited here who is not a member of the law enforcement community. Your comments reflect you have some knowledge, but they also show your agenda is obsfucation by way of excuses designed to deflect responsibility onto victims, and avoid public accountability.

It seems you both likely work in law enforcement, or have close ties to the law enforcement community in some way. Just my guess. I might be wrong on that. But if you are public servants, you're not good in that capacity given your endless excuse making.  

Jmschmidt812

And AGAIN your guess would be wrong. I have no ties to law enforcement, I'm just really tired of your one sided reporting. You consistantly publish half stories about circumstances that involved law enforcement. You post links to articles written by your staff from years ago, but don't mention it in your current articles. You do this to paint a picture of the scene you wish to tell. So before you assume for a THIRD time I'm in law enforcement or have ties to it, it just isn't TRUE.

Matt Westerhold

Sorry jmschmidt. I lumped you with Carlos because you two seem to be among the few who share the same implausible excuses and bash the Register for reporting this information with accusations that are shallow or otherwise unsubstantiated. You refer to it as "paint(ing)," but obviously, a news article must be crafted to tell the story. What would be the alternative to that? Would we write a news story without determining how it should be written?

Public officials have been given every opportunity to respond to the questions raised by scores of residents, experts, these families, and their supporters. The questions the Register has asked, and given them broad opportunities to answer, stem directly from those people, and their unanswered and ignored questions, and from the costly lawsuits, complaints, depositions, reports and other information related to these cases.

It would be simply wrong to not report their stories and instead allow officials to tell official stories that seem implausibe, at best, without reviewing the details, especially given the volume of these complaints from the public. Local public officials appear comfortable continuing to ignore their questions and questions from the Register. That's a different twist on the concept of "public service," but whether they respond is up to them. 

Really, Jmschmidt, there are at least two dead residents; at least one sexually exploited, mentally ill inmate; a family left to grapple with an unsolved homicide for 26 years and the suspiscion cast upon them by the sheriff's office; at least one recent botched death investigation in which evidence was detroyed; at least three questionable autopsies; and numerous other issues of concern. Your only real response to all of that  — it seems — is to complain the Register is picking on the poor public servants.  

Again, the Register's news coverage of these issues has been triggered by these families, and other families have contacted the Register with similar complaints. The Register news team will continue to develop news articles and will continue to give public officals broad opportunities to respond to questions as those additional news stories are written and published, with or without response from them.  

If you want the official story, then get a subscription to another newspaper.

Jmschmidt812

Then your perception of my comment is way off if you think I sympathize with the officials. My comment clearly stated that you SHOULDN'T lump the whole SCSO into one group. My sympathy lies with the rest of the office that has nothing to do with any of stories you have covered. They simply go to work and do their job and you tarnish their badge by collectively calling, or insinuating they are corrupt. If it's the officials you choose to condem then make that perfectly clear in future articles. The dispatchers, corrections officers, road patrol that had nothing to do with any of these cases shouldn't have a cloud of judgement over them because of what you report. Take your fight to the ones that deserve it, and leave the rest out of it. That my position

Matt Westerhold

It's not our fight. It's the families that are fighting. The Register is reporting. If the allegations the families have raised are accurate, then it's the officials responsible for the behavoir who are "tarnishing the badge," not the Register. 

Carlos Danger

Matt, you say "If you want the official story, then get a subscription to another newspaper"

I counter with this advice for your readers "If you want to read unbiased articles that present a fair representation of the facts, then get a subscription to another newspaper"

Matt Westerhold

It's all in the eye of the beholder, isn't it? You seem to be in agreement with attorney Dean Henry, who said other newspapers that are not reporting these stories, or not reporting with any depth, were "asking all the right questions." When public officials feel comfortable in difficult circumsatnces raised by members of the public, the questions they are being asked aren't worth the time it takes to ask them. 

Carlos Danger

Matt, Matt, Matt, as I've told you several times, I used to be a public servant.  That ended when I lost the Democratic primary for Mayor.  I'd use my real name on here, but I'm afraid your censors would ban me because of my last name.  And as usual, you get the facts wrong, I've never blamed the families of anybody for anything, and the only thing I blame on you and the reporters you control is the tabloid-like way you report on these stories while at the same time claiming to be a legitimate "news" outlet.  And, although I've violated none of your posting guidelines, it wouldn't surprise me if you ban me again for my constructive criticism of your "news"paper.

Matt Westerhold

Sure Carlos. The Cordle family "misinterpeted" what Detetctive O'Connell told them and morphed that into a promise that he broke. You're betting on that, right. 

Carlos is Back

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Personal attacks (including: name calling, presumption of guilt or guilt by association, insensitivity, or picking fights).

jacksonbrowne

Why thank you Peninsula. I actually think this was my second sensible post this week but I will take it.

DGMutley

Jmschmidt812,

This has nothing to do with the good guys; it's all about the bad guys, the Sheriff included.

Where is your outrage?

Jmschmidt812

I refuse to be outraged over circumstances that I don't have first hand knowledge about. You can be outraged all you want and assume the slanted reporting is accurate and unbiased. You can also buy the inquirer and believe the real Elvis was spotted at a Waffle House. Let me just say this, some of the stories could have been avoided had there been better decisions made by EVERYONE!!!

DGMutley

Carlos,

"biased interpretation"? Like the SR is making all this stuff up?

From the Register's Viewpoint:

"It's time for Stierwalt and the Sandusky County Sheriff's Office to start showing some respect to the victims of crime, and to quit stalling."

Why don't you get onboard, Carlos, and maybe all this stuff will start to go away!