Letter to the Editor: Is Bribery Running Rampant in Evansville Politics?

1. A criminal investigation takes time. You cannot write or inform the prosecutor and have an arrest within a little over a week.

   • The report was lodged with Nick Hermann in late August before the IU Med School was mentioned and the “Responsible Six” emerged. This was during the time when the votes for the hotel were looking like one vote would swing it 5-4 and either SBR and Connie Robinson were widely thought to be in a position to swing the vote.

     My phone calls to the County Prosecutor were placed last Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. I left messages each time. On Thursday I sent a friend request to Nick Hermann on Facebook thinking perhaps I could contact him that way. My phone calls were never returned and my Facebook request has not been accepted.

     This letter wasn’t meant to be an indictment of the County Prosecutor. It could well be just an oversight on his part, or a case of priorities in an undoubtedly busy job. I still give Mr. Hermann the benefit of the doubt, but a return of my phone calls would have been nice, even if just to explain that this matter was forwarded to the Attorney General or there was not enough evidence to pursue an indictment. Anything would have been better than silence.

     • Boy, is this a late case of CYA or what?

     • Brad— you state above “…an assurance of no contest in the next election if said Member voted “yes”…”.

       No one can assure anybody they will not have an opponent in any political election. No one under any circumstance can actually do that.

       • The essence of the assurance was that this person would not field a candidate to oppose SBR, a bit of info which narrows the field of possible perpetrators considerably, don’t you think, Wayne?

         • I repeat–Nobody can stop a person from filing for an office if that person wants to run for that positon.

         • You’re splitting hairs. Let’s say for the sake of argument the person issuing the bribe was one of the local Party Chairmen or a union leader. In this case, such a person, while not being in a position to guarantee no opponent, would be in a position to virtually guarantee any opponent could not generate widespread support enough to constitute a serious threat.

       • C’mon Wayne! Surely in your position, you have seen the hubris that goes hand-in-hand with even small political successes. Nobody can “guarantee” that they are going to take their next breath, but that doesn’t keep egomaniacs from trying. Petty politicians are really bad about “writing checks with their mouths that their backsides can’t pay.”

       • Wayne, I agree with you. I have no stand on this issue or friendship with any of the folks mentioned and am simply a voting citizen who enjoys the CCO.

         Gentlemen, this is starting to sound like a bunch of old hens standing at the gossip fence hanging laundry and their rivals! Reality is harsh enough but now all of these rumors (thinly layered to get in some free plugs for a very nice and astute Councilwoman) is starting to feel petty and an early election rally and/or smear campaign. This “rumored person” must really think a lot of themselves and their power too, which had me smirking because such a person was pretty stupid to have been so easily “caught”. Maybe their name was “Vinnie or Guido”

2. I guess some of our Politicans are above the law ,who knows they all may be getting a slice of the
   pie

3. I really didn’t like SBR when she first got elected but time has proven again and again how wrong I was, She has turned out to be a diamond in a field largely composed of coal

   • She is fighting for the citizens that’s true. She has been on the side of the general public a lot of times and I see that as a good thing. She has what I would call “Integrety”

     Wayne is Brad calling you out? 🙂

     Brad is right in that union leaders have a lot of say and have the Mayor’s ear. Even some union business agents get jobs with the city that they are not really qualified for but end up in high positions in some agencies within the city administration. Funny how that works. It’s not what you know it’s who you know and how many dollars and votes you can deliver for the candidates that matters to the candidates these days. I find that disgusting and unhealthy. It’s not wonder Evansville is in the shape it’s in. This city should be run on more of a merit system. Like others have said and I’m starting to agree, this city needs a qualified city manager not a mayor. The mayor is more of a political figure and symbolic in most functions. Thank God we have a city council that’s not afraid to stand up to the Mayor and call him out on bad decisions. Bad decisions like trying to give away 37.5 million tax dollars to people we don’t even know.

4. Hermann won’t do anything and they can’t prove it anyway. Hermann is a good ole boy crony just like the rest of them downtown.

5. Mrs. Brinkerhoff-Riley’s hard work, research (that takes hours to be as informed as she is at EVERY SINGLE MEETING) and utter, unimpeachable integrity have flabbergasted me.
   She is amazing!
   She and Atty. Danks have contributed very generous hunks of their very expensive time, just to improve the lot for the citizenry (who, frankly, are given NO CONSIDERATION WHATSOEVER in the grand schemes of certain financial adventurers-they use OUR money to bribe, punish, and straight out blackmail-anything to audaciously achieve their ends)
   Dr. Adams could retire after a long, successful career, and fish, instead he comes in there and spars with these people (some whom are very disrespectful when they get called out on bald faced lies) many thanks to you, Dr. Adams.
   I am grateful to Al Lindsey, he is in a close knit group, and he knows that are repercussions for not going along with the status quo, just because his gut tells him it’s the wrong thing to do-these people don’t get much more than grief (and in OUR LOCAL politics, that grief can cost for years-it can cost your whole family-because a person who has a little power and not many scruples can cause much behind the scenes problems) so I applaud their efforts (Note: Al Lindsey simply won a position that someone wanted for their buddy, and it nearly cost him his 30 year career-that’s how vicious and petty these people are-the greater good is of no interest to them.)
   Rick Davis ran against the “chosen one” who considered a nomination bought and paid for-beat him-and the party he had supported all of his adult life turned on him like snakes-he lost, yes-but he showed us forever how power hungry snakes can be-just how far they will go to power their personal agendas. They’re still up to the old games, but, to their frustration, I don’t think the old ways are going to work anymore. Rick Davis paid a dear price for his efforts.
   You all give me hope for better days.
   PS-Mr Winnecke, don’t send donation requests to my home-I wouldn’t help you across the street.

6. I still wondering if Evansville is still being repaid the 500k? it initially gave Earth Scam.

   Also just look at how much the taxpayers would have got reemed by Winnecke if it werent for a little questioning and a google search. 5 mil for Earth Scam + about 20 mil for the Hotel. Not to mention how he wanted to steal your homestead as a councilman. He has a record and history of wanted to steal from the people and blowing it like a rapper at a stripjoint.

   • “Got a handful of tax, better grab an umbrella. I make it rain.” – Lil Lloyd

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fls8VU7XClU

     • Brad Linzy: You state : “I like to think of myself as a reasonable man.”

       You have a mistaken belief of yourself. You are not a reasonable man.

       • You make a thoughtful, compelling, and exhaustive argument against which I find myself intellectually paralyzed. Congratulations, Wayne. You have bested me.

       • Wayne, is there a reason you get on the CCO and belittle people? It seems very tacky for the GOP head to get on a blog and argue with people. Grow up!

         • Ditto! There is nothing to be gained by what you are doing. Of course, as unpopular as politicians in general, and Republicans in particular are right now, I guess you don’t have much to lose, either.

7. I think Brad thinks he is entitled to an answer that he is not due.

   His “allegation” of bribery sure likes like it would fall into a category of hearsay (information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience nor can it be adequately substantiated).

   His comment that he has “personal knowledge” of an alleged event does not (based on this letter) get close to the concept of establishing the “burden of proof” necessary for the prosecutor to make a case.

   Furthermore, I feel strongly that his rash action of publishing a letter like this with his “opinions” of the alleged “bribery” will probably be a source of harm to this case (if it in fact even exists). Last time I checked the local prosecutor does not answer to Brad Linzy, and I know of no duty or obligation for him to “respond” to Brad in any time period whatsoever.

   So what if it has been “over a week” since Brad notified the prosecutors office about an allegation of “bribery”? I think that an allegation as serious as this requires serious time and effort to properly investigate, and by publishing this accusation that the local prosecutor is somehow “ignoring” him could very well come back to bite him in the butt.

   Accusing a sitting prosecutor of malfeasance is a very serious charge. Brad snarks his way around the entire story, but he is trying to lay out grounds that Nick Hermann is apparently (in Brad Linzys view) guilty of some sort of prosecutorial misconduct, which is a very serious allegation all in itself.

   The more I think on it and take the time to read this entire “letter”, the more I have to laugh at the stunning lack of hubris on the part of Brad Linzy. He clearly thinks that just because he makes an “allegation” of something that he and the rest of the public have a right to know about it.

   I think Mr. Linzy has set himself up for some serious problems in sending this letter to the CCO and throwing it out in the open. He has the potential for being charged with a variety of offenses if his public posting of his “allegations” are later found to have hampered or interfered with an ongoing law investigation.

   Indiana law enforcement and the prosecutor have a large number of tools at their disposal for investigation of a crime, and by putting this information out in this manner it would not shock me to see the county prosecutor slap him down in some fashion, and he would darn well deserve it. If these “allegations” have even a scintilla of fact behind them, the investigation will be conducted at a proper time and place and on a schedule decided by the prosecutors office, not based on what Brad Linzy thinks he is “owed” by way of an explanation to “update the public on any ongoing investigations involving bribery of public officials in Vanderburgh County”.

   It appears that Mr. Linzy must think he is quite the legal scholar, but maybe he should research things like “grand jury”, “sealed indictment”, “burden of proof”, “hearsay”, “rules of evidence”, and Mr. Linzy probably should become VERY familiar with the legal term called “defamation”.

   I am very disappointed that the CCO would even consider posting this for a single second. Not only does it question the integrity of numerous individuals, it clearly has the potential to impact and even impede any investigation or prosecution for the “allegations” made by Mr. Linzy.

   By allowing Mr. Linzy to seemingly rant at will on here just screams out to the general public that there is a “wild, wild west” of slanted and politically oriented hack jobs towards local elected officials that are allowed on the CCO in the name of a “Letter To The Editor”. I question the motivations of Mr. Linzy in writing this diatribe, because if he was truly interested in “justice” he would keep this set of “allegations” to himself rather than blather on and break his arm patting himself on the back.

   All Mr. Linzy has done at this point is malign and impugn a number of elected officials with insubstantial “allegation” and has potentially put any investigation in jepordy by releasing this information without regard to any legal consequences. If he was actually concerned about the “allegations” he would have done a little homework and looked into reporting this further up the “ladder” in the proper legal circles (Indiana Attorney General, Federal Prosecutor,FBI, etc). Mr. Linzy sure puts a lot at risk just to be online with a “OOH! OOH! LOOK AT WHAT I SAY!” mentality, and I will be amused if it bites him in the butt

   Stay tuned……

   • How can I be charged with defamation? I didn’t even mention the name of the person who did the alleged bribing. Furthermore, I was careful to use the term “alleged” when describing the bribery. Further still, while you’re absolutely correct in that the Prosecutor does not answer to me or any other activist or journalist, neither can I be charged with some crime for asking questions about the status of an investigation. Lastly, as one of my above comments clarifies, the original disclosure by SBR to Nick Hermann happened sometime in late August, according to a conversation I had with her directly, which I can back up with evidence if that becomes necessary, which I suspect it will not.

     I have done nothing but tell the truth in this letter. I stand by everything I said.

     • Brad,

       I’ll say be careful about choosing when and where to make your stand. While you may be ready to face the firing squad, others that feed you the information may not. No matter how much you compliment them in writing. It hasn’t even been a month since SBR asked the editor to remove documents that she had given to be leaked. I have a feeling that when the time comes, politicians will be politicians and leave the activists hanging.

     • I think you are probably attempting to reply on a variety of factors to shield your comments, and I think there is a decent chance that your logic is flawed.

       Indiana does recognize that defamation of a “public figure” has a higher burden for defamation, but since your “allegation” points to some unknown third party who you “allege” made a bribery attempt, you will probably not be able to escape Indiana defamation law.

       Furthermore, and this is for the editor of the CCO, I realize that you hold yourself out to be an “online newspaper”, and as such you are probably thinking you are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act which basically holds webmasters harmless when defamatory content is published to their website by a third party. However, in this case you are participating in the posting of the letter by Mr. Linzy. I do not think that by heading the letter with a “Posted by the CCO without edit, opinion, or bias” will shield you if legal action is initiated.

       Finally, I think Mr. Linzy should do some reading on the fact that Indiana is a Per Se State. What that means means is that Defamation Per Se in Indiana constitutes “any publication or statement that is by itself defamatory with the intent of ruining the plaintiff’s reputation, fiscal well-being, or social standing”. Defamation Per Se statements include “statements alleging the plaintiff committed a crime or has acted in a manner unbecoming with his or her profession”.

       All I have seen and heard (based on the letter by Mr. Linzy) is that he “heard about” something, and based on that “heard about” knowledge he made a call (or in this case it appears he made a number of calls) to the local prosecutor making an “allegation” of a crime or misconduct.

       What astounds me is the utter lack of hubris by Br. Linzy in his diatribe about the “alleged” events is that he seems to feel he has been mistreated and ignored for not hearing back from the prosecutor in this case. And the cherry on top is that his “Friend” request on Facebook has not been accepted by the local prosecutor. Boo-hoo. I give a +1 to Nick Hermann for NOT accepting a friend request from someone who clearly has some sort of agenda or axe to grind.

       Additionally, Mr. Linzy needs to do some research on the subject of “corroboration”, which is what actual journalists do when they decide to publish a story. I know of no actual journalist who would dare to print a story of this magnitude without some sort of “corroborative evidence”. Indiana law precedents shows that courts VERY frequently require corroboration to establish that an “allegation” made by a single individual (in this case the letter writer Mr. Linzy) be supported, and his “hearsay” knowledge in the matter at hand is laughable.

       The federal court system uses the same logic, holding that “it is thus a sound principle that requires incriminatory statements of questionable reliability, made outside of the presence of a judge, to be corroborated by substantial, independent evidence before their admission into evidence against the accused. But the natural suspicion surrounding such statements does not justify a rule which would require, not only such corroboration as would lend credence to the statements of the accused, but also substantial evidence of every element of the offense with which he is charged.” Mr. Linzys letter and phone calls lack the ability (IMHO) to substantiate and/or corroborate that a crime occurred, just that he “heard” about something that HE thinks was “illegal”

       One thing that bothers me a lot is how Mr. Linzy has involved Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley is his story. Since she is an Indiana licensed attorney, and that Mr. Linzy has alleged that this “bribery attempt” happened back in August, he puts her in a precarious position before the Indiana Bar Association. Attorneys have a Canon of Ethics to follow, and as an Officer of the Court she would probably be compelled to report this attempt immediately. I have no doubt that if this “story” concocted by Mr. Linzy did occur that Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley would have immediately reported it to the proper authorities. What I fail to understand is why Mr. Linzy feels he has some sort of obligation to “reveal” this story, and what effect it has to not only the stellar local reputation of Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley, but what this story means to her as an Indiana attorney and an Officer of the Court.

       My Take On This: If a crime occurs, either by or to an elected or appointed governmental official, you can (and should) report it if you have first hand knowledge of it (you actually saw it happen), and there are numerous avenues for any “alleged” crimes to be investigated and ultimately prosecuted. I think everyone will agree that if a crime or attempted crime occurs that the actual elected or appointed official has a duty and obligation to report it, and I am fairly confident that they would do so. However, this far-fetched “whisper campaign” of “allegations” by Mr. Linzy has all the hallmarks of someone with a hidden agenda. By calling people out by name he is wading into dangerous waters, and he is dragging the CCO with him.

       Stay tuned….

       • I agree with your take on the Facebook thing. Jordan Baer told me Monday that he had tried to reach Chris Cooke via Facebook. Facebook is a personal social media site. It is not the proper forum for a constiuent to reach a public servant. I understand that it can be frustrating when you don’t get a reply and Facebook seems convenient and a sure-fire way of reaching someone, but we need to refrain from that in the same way that we don’t knock on the door to their homes or call their personal phone number.

   • One more thing… my letter specifically states this was my “next” method of recourse, not my “last”.

     The next step will be a call to Greg Zoeller.

     • Yeah, I am very confident that this will get you plenty of attention for your “allegations”….NOT!

       Give it up, will you? All you are doing is doing an insane job of dragging the good name and reputation of Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley, someone who has given a lot of time and effort to Evansville by taking some brave positions on a number of issues while on the City Council.

       Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley is an attorney, and if there is need of a criminal complaint she is capable of handling it without the muddlesome way you are screwing around with this bunch of nonsense.

       We all realize that you just love to see your name all over the news (even if the CCO is the only one that allows you to blather on at length). We get it, you feel important by making “something out of nothing”, and that you apparently feel that the “injustices” of the world need you to ride in and rescue Evansville and Vanderburgh County.

       Please consider professional help. I mean that as sincerely as I can say it. Your delusions are getting worse all the time, and Lord only knows what it is like to be around you in person. But by making the wild accusations in this “editorial” all you are doing is creating a headache for a very good local attorney who is on the City Council. The best thing you could do to resolve this situation is to suddenly take a vow of silence or refrain from all Internet related activity. I can say with some confidence that a lot of people would deeply appreciate that.

       At least give it a try.

       • Maybe Brad should consider seeking help thru BA (Bloggers Anonymous).

       • Keep attempting to shoot the messenger. Just don’t blame me when Evansville’s political arena gets overrun by vipers.

         What’s scary is that we have two Council Members who didn’t report anything at all. At least one of them should have recused themselves from that vote.

         At this point, my letter has been pushed off the political category by three articles that aren’t even political. What’s that tell ya?

         • “What’s scary is that we have two Council Members who didn’t report anything at all”

           So you keep alleging. No proof, no dates, no names, nothing from you but repeated hot air.

           If you want to be brave and get the “facts” out there, step up to the plate and show us what a brave “newsman” you are and tell us the rest of the people you are so certain were approached with a bribe. You keep skirting around the topic, we can all tell you are just itching to tell more on this.

           So if you are so damn sure of the “facts”, tell the whole story. Tell us all the City Council members who were approached, gives us the dates and times and locations, and (most importantly) tell us who you are alleging offered these “bribes”.

           Yeah, we thought so.

         • You’ll have to ask Stephanie who tried to bribe her. All I know is what she and another Council Member told me, that an attempt was made which was thought to be at least worthy enough of note to report to the County Prosecutor Nick Hermann who won’t return my phone calls.

           I do have the information of who did the alleged bribing in the other incidents, but since I have no direct evidence, I’m not naming names in those incidents at this time.

           Like I said, I stand behind everything in this letter and can back it up with evidence. The stuff I left out is the stuff I can only back up with hearsay, which is why I only touched upon them briefly.

           Keep shooting the messenger.

   • I agree with your assessment of the CCO printing this letter.

   • Well my friend, there is one person who has “first hand” knowledge of what was said. Did she sign an affidavit detailing what transpired?

     This is a very serious matter if a member of the Common Council of The City of Evansville was approached in this manner, and if true, it calls for the strongest action.

     ___

   • Agreed…

8. ClassyEvillePolitics this a very good response to Brad Linzy. He needs to read it several times and let it sink in.

   Brad’s “Letter to the Editor” does no good for anything or anybody.

   For Brad to be critical that the prosecutors office has not responded to his demand is absolutely ridiculous.

   • Thanks, Wayne. We might not agree on some things, but I appreciate the kind words. I took my time researching my points to make sure I was on the right track.

     Nothing good will come of the publishing of this letter, and I sadly think that in the long run it will do more damage than good. There is a huge potential for collateral damage to reputations in the wildness of the accusations in this letter, and in the long run I think Mr. Linzy might regret this letter.

     Then again, watching how Mr. Linzy proverbially “shoots from the hip” when it comes to slinging around accusations, I have to wonder if he will realize that he is inflicting a considerable amount of disparagement to Stephanie Brinkerhoff-Riley and the local governmental community by making these “allegations” without a shred of proof.

     Stay tuned…

9. Politics is at its worst here in evansville
   we have crooked Politicans in both parties
   I remember back in grade school we were told that
   The best form of government is the true form of
   Communism which it cannot exist because someone
   always steps up to take over power
   What ever kind of government we have now ,we’ll it isn’t working very well…

   • I am not aware of any politician from either party in Vanderburgh County that is crooked. Not making good decisions does not make a person crooked.

     Who ever told you–“The best form of government is the true form of Communism..” is full of crap.

     • Wayne, I’m sure you have a pretty warped definition of crooked. You have no say in such an argument.

       • John Doe–What do you mean I have no say?

         • I think he is trying to say that people can see right thru your shady tactics Wayne.

     • What I’ve noticed is that people tend to throw the crooked label out like it’s not a serious allegation against the morality of another person. We can disagree with other people, but we have to realize that we are almost always speaking in opinions to which everyone is entitled. There is a difference between requesting, inquiring and/or writing about an investigation and accusing people of a conspiratorial cover-up. Tread carefully, Brad. I also would disagree with you labeling yourself as a reasonable man, but that’s a good thing.

       “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” – George Bernard Shaw

       Keep being unreasonable.

10. It’s hard to see when you have blinders on.
    In the true form of communism everybody is equal
    Only problem is someone steps in to take over and then you have what is called socialism
    If I’m not mistaken aren’t we governed just like the ancient Romans were
    They were a democracy too and Nero fiddled while Rome burnt to the ground
    Our country was meant to be a republic governed by elected officials representing the people
    which they do not do
    Our forefathers would be turning in their graves if they knew
    I care less what you think ,yes I love my country and it’s time the people take it back
    from the fat lawyers and crooked Politicans
    Wayne ,that’s just how I see it

    • Yes, Rome started as a Republic just like the US. It devolved into autocracy when Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49 B.C.E. from there it was a steady fall over the next 500 years. Corruption was rampant, the welfare of the state became dependent upon conquest, the monetary system was debased, and the morality and quality of life of the common people suffered.

11. I think the author of this letter has opened up a can of worms they are likely to have to eat. A serious allegation regarding a breach of the public trust with no proof to support that allegation. Those three little words are likely to meet your ears: “cease and desist”.

12. This whole thing is odd and has a bunch of different stories within it. As Brad knows from our conversations, I believe that any type of payment to an elected official is wrong. It’s even worse in this matter because it was over something trivial that I think we all wanted in some form or another. The problem we have with taking any further action is that, from what was made known to me, the person was a “friend” and may have been joking with the offer. It would not be on Hermann to file the charges without a complaint made through the police. The same would be true if you were to contact Zoeller, before contacting ISP. Even if the complaint were file through proper channels, it would be up to the law enforcement agencies to decide if pursuing the complaint is within the public’s best interest. Are we advocating that they spend public money on pursuing something that would be impossible to prove and therefore impossible to convict? That sounds more like someone just wants the person publicly smeared instead of justice to be served. As far as Hermann not returning your call, I don’t see much issue in that either. Yes, he is a public servant that works for me and you, but I would think our tax dollars are better served by fighting crime. Could you imagine if everyone in Vanderburgh County, expected a call personally from the Prosecutor? He’d spend his whole term on the phone.

    • I have to agree with what Mr Davis is sayin’ here, while it would be nice to get a response, since Mr Linzy isn’t a party in any of the possible on-going investigation he’s really not entitled to a response from Mr Herman having said that it would be a great gesture to just say “I can’t comment on an on-going investigation” and hope it all goes away.

      Another thing that comes to mind is that possibly Mr Linzy has made it to the “Black List” of citizen?, one of the hazards of being vocal and posting under your real name, or basically just being a dot on the political radar as a enemy target.

      JMHO

    • Phyllip , bribery to a public official is not a joking matter ,one that needs to be taken seriously
      And it appears Mr. Herman May have swept it under the rug , I honestly do not know and
      am not making any accusations .
      I was not against a downtown hotel ,I was against taxpayer monies being used on something
      When we were told there would be no return on investment

      • I agree. It is not a laughing matter, but in this situation it would be impossible to prove in a court of law that it happened. The only purpose for pursuing it would be to “out” the person that made the alleged bribe. I wouldn’t neccesarily be opposed to that, but I wouldn’t want to waste taxpayers’ money on a witch hunt with no end game.

      • I do not personally know Nick Hermann, and have only met him around a dozen times or so at various events and meetings, but your comment that it “appears” he may have “swept it around the rug” has no factual basis other than Mr. Linzy ranting about it.

        As I stated in another post, the general public has no RIGHT to an investigation by a county prosecutor, and this is especially the case with an “allegation” of a crime of bribery. I cannot imagine how many months it would take to successfully investigate this type of crime.

        That factor is multiplied by the issue that the person “reporting” the bribery has thus far offered nothing but second or third hand information (otherwise known in legal circles as hearsay).

        If the county prosecutor launched a huge investigation every time a citizen calls and states “I heard about this crime from a person who was told about it by a reliable source”, everyone in the county would be screaming for his head on a platter for wasting resources for meaningless investigations or “witch hunts”.

        The bottom line is a concept known as “prosecutorial discretion”, and the exercise of that is fairly absolute. There is no legal reason for an investigation to be made public unless there is a good reason for it. Just cause Brad did not get his “Friend Request” back on Facebook seems to mean that his widdle feelings are out of whack.

        Besides, everyone in this area knows that the Civic Center has more leaks than the Titanic. If this story had ANY factual basis for it they would be Xeroxing news flyers and handing it out on street corners

        • What’s your interest in this?

          You keep misleading people by insinuating I was calling Nick Hermann to report the bribe. That’s inaccurate. SBR reported it back in August (according to a statement she gave to me). I was merely trying to find out information on the investigation for a possible story.

          So, you’re totally wrong. Either you’re misleading on purpose or you’re too stupid to read.

13. Anotherlocal says: I think he is trying to say that people can see right thru your shady tactics Wayne.

    What exactly are you referring to? I tell it like it is?

    Anotherlocal–why do you hide behind an assumed name?

    • Wayne I hide behind a screen name because I do not trust people like you

      • You don’t “hide” behind anything, all of us choose to use anonymous names because we recognize that there are paybacks for having a descending point of view that goes against the status quo.

        JMHO

14. The allegations reported in this letter are far too serious to be ignored. If these allegations are not dealt with in a fair and timely manner I expect the alleged guilty party and the company they represent to be publically identified.

    I’m certain that will happen given the lack of patience shown in this letter.

    At that time we must put pressure on elected officials to prove or disprove said allegations.
    If the company that allegedly offered a bribe is found guilty we must never do business with that company as well as the person offering the bribe because all parties would be guilty-if those are the findings. Blacklist everyone involved!

    If the prosecutor does not find sufficient evidence to move forward we the public have a right to know.

    Either way this issue has to be taken very seriously and dealt with in accordance with our laws, principles and scruples.

    • Jumbo states “If the prosecutor does not find sufficient evidence to move forward we the public have a right to know”

      No, you do NOT have that right. No questions about it, you are absolutely wrong on that one. At a bare minimum if this “allegation” is investigated it would likely be presented to a grand jury. Grand jury proceedings are secret. No judge is present and the proceedings are led by a prosecutor. While court reporters usually transcribe the proceedings, the records are sealed.

      This is American Jurisprudence 101, pure black letter law. Your opinion that you have a “right” to know anything is just too bad for you. There is not a conspiracy in everything that happens, so chill out and just wait to see if this “allegation” by Mr. Linzy has any validity.

      Stay tuned….

      • So what do you think CEP? Should this be presented to a Grand Jury, assuming that SBR swore an affidavit?

        • PAK, if SBR did actually swear out an affidavit then I think that would merit presentation to a Grand Jury. But the issue remains that if it is presented to a Grand Jury, if they return a “no bill” result, then they have decided there is insufficient evidence to make a case, and it falls to the prosecutor to either drop it or continue to investigate and re-present if more evidence is found.

          Of course there is always the chance that a continued “fishing expidition” is counter-productive after a certain length of time. As they say on TV, a good prosecutor can “indict a ham sandwich”, and I tend to agree with that. Getting a “true bill” from a grand jury is usually pretty straight forward, and most savvy prosecutors do no present to the grand jury unless they are reasonably sure they can make their case, since one an indictment is handed down the defendant can ask for a speedy trial. If that happens and the case is flimsy, double jeopardy is attached, and all hell would break loose in this town if this kind of case goes to trial with a 100% rock-solid case.

          Mr. Linzy keeps making his so-far unsubstantiated claims about this happening to three City Council members, and sure seems to appear to say that he is “in the know” about the situation. I am simply calling his bluff and stating that if he has so much information, throw it out on here and state who he thinks are the rest of the players in this matter.

          Bottom line to me? If there is a case, and SBR swore out an affidavit, then it should (and probably did or will) go to a Grand Jury. If the facts are sufficient, then the county prosecutor will handle it and take it to trial. But since Grand Jury dealings are by law secret, unless an arrest warrant (or mare than one) is issued, then there is no story here outside the small-minded in this community who live for gossip and innuendo. I have no problem in stating that I personally think Brad Linzy is full of it and overestimates his self-importance, and that this entire episode is a matter of character assassination by insinuation. And if I am correct about that, I hope it comes back to bite him in every way possible.

          “Justice means minding one’s own business and not meddling with other men’s concerns” Plato

          • You’re a real piece of work. Whose character am I assassinating? Whose names did I even mention other than SBR, who I already said did the right thing and deserves praise in the matter, and Nick Hermann, who hasn’t called me back to answer questions about what, if anything, he has done to follow up.

            Tell me how anyone’s character has been assassinated by me. This should be interested, to say the least.

          • If the political fortunes of Evansville are ever going to advance someone will have to step out of the line and say..enough, I serve all of the people who elected me and not just the wealthy and the well connected.

            __

            “those who govern ought not to be lovers of the task? For, if they are, there will be rival lovers, and they will fight.”
            ― Plato, The Republic

          • When I look at local politicians I am always asking myself if this person is there because of a sense of duty, or because of ambition.

            We need to keep electing the former, and we need to show the latter the door.

            __

          • Brad Linzy says: “Nick Hermann, who hasn’t called me back to answer questions about what, if anything, he has done to follow up”

            As Ronald Reagan famously said “Well, there you go again”

            I’ll try and state this in small words for you, Brad. Please try and keep up.

            Provide ANY reference to ANY State or Federal law that proves that a county prosecutor “owes” you a phone call?

            Provide ANY reference to ANY State or Federal law that proves that a county prosecutor has any obligation to report to you what efforts may be under way to “follow up” on your blathering and allegations.

            Until you can do that, you are wasting space in the Internet. The legalities of what you “allege” are clearly beyond your ability to comprehend that IF an investigation is warranted (please notice the emphasis on IF) that it will be done in a proper method as required by law.

            Personally, based on the rather clear nature of how you have handled this by playing “tattle-tale” and attempting to intimidate and bait people, if I were in Nick Hermanns shoes I would not waste a phone call to you.

          • I never said he “owed me” a phone call. You used those terms, not me. All I’ve tried to say is my phone calls were placed out of a sincere interest to see what became of any investigation. I was calling as a journalist in pursuit of a story, not in some attempt to corner Nick Hermann or implicate him in a coverup. He didn’t have to call me, but he didn’t have to ignore me either. He made the choice he made, so rather than submitting an article containing more information and quotes from Hermann, I submitted a letter to the editor detailing what I knew, including the FACT that my calls to Hermann were summarily ignored. Your attacks against me, my character, and my intent are unfounded and I’ll-considered.

            Had I not attempted to get in touch with Nick Hermann and had I written this letter without trying to follow up with him first to get his input you would have criticized me for NOT calling him. “Classy” indeed.

            Do you wish that I had just kept quiet about this? Is that it?

          • OK, one step at a time to illustrate the blatant falsehood in your last post.

            First Thing, Your Assertion That “I never said he “owed me” a phone call”

            Apparently you either cannot remember what you write or you have trouble reading it. So a close examination of what is on this page has the following all said by YOU talking about how the prosecutor was not calling you:

            “Although ample opportunity has been given for Mr. Hermann to respond to my inquiries, alarmingly I have heard nothing from him in this regard.”

            “it has been to my great disappointment my inquiries thus far have gone without reply”

            “The failure of Prosecutor Nick Hermann to return my phone calls doesn’t bolster my confidence in the investigative process”

            “My phone calls were never returned and my Facebook request has not been accepted.”

            “Nick Hermann, who hasn’t called me back to answer questions about what, if anything, he has done to follow up”

            These statements paint a clear picture of YOU complaining about Mr. Hermann not returning your calls. We can all tell that you are just crushed because Mr. Hermann has not “friended” you on Facebook and not called you back, but as I have said before, if I was Mr. Hermann I would not call you back either, especially after your professed pestering of him by calling him multiple days in a row in one week. You prove that you cannot take a hint, that is for sure. If he wants to talk to you, I think he has your number by now. Based on what you have written in your “letter to the editor” and your numerous posts on how Mr. Hermann has not “returned your calls” you seem to not be able to realize that you are probably seen as a nuisance and an annoyance, and at the very least that your “allegations” have no merit (or credibility).

            “I was calling as a journalist in pursuit of a story”. Oh! My! God! Are you freaking kidding me? You think because the CCO allows you to constantly get on here and write your “conspiracy theories” that you now qualify as a “journalist”? Who is it that you are a “journalist” for, the CCO? If that is the case, I would make a sincere and heartfelt request to the CCO or the editorial staff to please confirm that and clear this one up right away. I guess you have a “press pass” and other assorted credentials to back up your “journalism” status? Somehow I cannot see how someone from the “Electric Tooth Syndrome” can be called a “journalist”. Maybe you wrote for your high school paper or something, but your assertion that you are a “journalist” is a pretty rock solid case of either “delusions of grandeur” or a “psychotic break”.

            After thinking on this and reading over all the various things you write, I really do feel badly for you. It appears that you are linking the constant latitude of the CCO staff to allow you to write all that you want on a daily basis and as often as you want to thinking you are a “journalist”, but do you really and truly think that this now makes you a “journalist”? A simple search of that term shows that “journalist is someone who researches, writes, and reports information to present in sources, conduct interviews, engage in research, and make reports”. Writing “letters to the editor” of an on-line blog does not make you a “journalist”, and you truly think it does, well, you should consider some help.

            For the record, “journalism” has both ethics which (historically and currently) includes principles like truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability, as these apply to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent dissemination to the public. My personal opinion is that I would hardly consider 99% of the things you write on-line to be a single or combination example of any of the above. Feel free to illuminate us on how you think you qualify as a “journalist”. I daresay that we will all find it to be interesting.

            It is interesting that you bring this up while Congress is grappling with coming up with a definition of a “shield law” that would allow true “journalists” to be protected as they professionally practice their craft, and the “shield law” is to give them protections against revealing their “sources” and their “notes” in the face of government interference. As part of that Congressional debate it defines a “journalist” who would be covered under the “shield law” as “someone who has had an “employment relationship” with a media outlet for at least one year out of the last 20, or three months out of the last five years”. To me seeing the word “employment” implies that there is a financial aspect to a relationship, so unless you are willing to state that you are a “paid” employee of the CCO, I think you are proverbially “out in the cold” on your new “journalism” career.

            If the CCO gets on here and states that you are officially a “journalist” for them, I will retract my statement to the contrary. However, IMHO status as a “mole” does not equate to that of a “journalist” in modern society. And if you pulled the “journalist” line on the county prosecutor when you called (over and over and over), then I think we probably know another reason he is not calling you back. In fact, masquerading as a “journalist” without proper credentials

15. Freedom of the Press is extended to anyone who has one, and nowadays that is just about everyone.

    Citizen Journalism is here, its real, and it is not going away, as Matt Drudge has been demonstrating for a good number of years now.

    http://youtu.be/RvcA75f9_ik

    So there is no argument to be made here on whether Mr. Linzy IS a journalist. Just what type of journalist Mr. Linzy is is of course open to individual interpretation.
    The same thing can be said of Jack Pate, Tim Ethridge, Chuck Leach, or Joe Wallace.

    In that vain, may I offer some guidelines put together by people with some expertise in the field?:

    http://www.journalism.org/resources/principles-of-journalism/

    Principals 4 and 5 are of particular interest to me as a lifetime consumer of local news because it is there that I see the straying from these principals most often takes place.

    One has to ask the question: why did the Evansville Courier&Press sit on the story of the city’s unreconciled financial ledgers for a time period of a YEAR AND A HALF, and ACROSS TWO CITY ADMINISTRATIONS? What does that do to their “journalistic integrity”? Should Jack Pate be sitting on the Board of the Evansville Regional Business Committee, consider that committee’s involvement in so many politically charged projects where public dollars are used?

    So before we pass sentence on Mr. Lindsy for poor journalistic practices, let those among you who are without sin cast the first stone.

    ___

16. I have recently joined the Dreyfess initiative, started by the actor Richard Dreyfess. He has gathered thousands of supporters who want more transparency and understanding of our local, state, and federal government. That may seem off the subject, but it calls for stricter guidance and understanding of our constitution. Specifically, it calls upon citizens to demand access of information on government policy. We as citizens deserve to see decisions, votes, laws, rulings, budgets, etc. In a portal that is publicly accessible. Am personally more concerned about our water and sewage system, than a hotel. When is revenue going to be used to build our infrastructure and the things we rely on for our safety and health. Is the revenue for the Ford arena going to be used for othe sport parks or hotels for casinos while we drown? Waste and shadiness. It’s time for the citizens to strike, to demand information, the politicians won’t do it on free will. Evansville has become a crippled city–waiting on revenue from big ideas, big money, big politics. What a joke, I empathize with Brad and all the residents I have spoken to with closed doors slammed on their faces. It’s time we stand-up. The Dreyfessinitiative.org. Is where I’m starting.

Comments are closed.