Corruption? Collusion? Just Plain Crap?

The media *coughCd'APresscough* has remained mysteriously silent on something I find quite disturbing... Dave Williams, a probation officer who'd been with the department around 9 or 10 years, was fired after some sordid allegations by a gal named Wanda Arrington, one of the dozens of probationers under his supervision, happening, unfortunately for Dave, to be one of the female ones. In her complaint to the authorities, she claimed he called at late hours, asking questions about her boyfriend, her state of dress/undress, and other questions with sexual undertones.

Some of his actions she was complaining about were legit- P.O.'s are allowed to call whenever they darn well please- how else are they to know if you're keeping curfew rules? and are perfectly within their rights to ask about the probationer's company they're keeping. The other alleged questions, if true, are of course way out of line. Yet odd, as well, considering Ms. Arrington is not exactly filling society's mold of what's "attractive". It'd have to be a mighty big mold, if so. No offense against the many overweight women out there, but you'd think if a probation officer was taking a gigantic risk by "hitting on" one of his supervisees (is that a word?) he'd pick one of the young, sultry meth-induced big-eyed skinnies with which his caseload I'm sure abounded. Instead, according to Wanda, he picked instead: an older alcoholic with a mouth as big as the rest of her.

But hey, perhaps Dave's tastes now run that direction- who knows? His ex-wife was quite a looker, but after their extremely messy (and, unfortunately for him, public) breakup, perhaps he swore off pretty women forever.

So... the thing that really struck me as curious is that the Press never once bothered to inform the public in their articles denouncing Mr. Williams that the prosecution's star witness, Ms. Arrington, was incarcerated shortly after these charges against Officer Williams- by a different (presumably neutral) P.O.- for multiple infractions of her supervision: the probation violations will usually almost certainly land her back in prison. The other charge, "spitting on the sidewalk", I have no idea what the sentencing guidelines on that bad boy is. What conclusion I can draw from the fact that it's even listed on there as a charge is that she musta really ticked the arresting officer off for him to even charge her with such a petty offense. Drunk again? Or maybe she just had a bad taste in her mouth...

Wonder if some sort of deal is in the process of being cut...?

The only reason I found out about her current residence was by idly scanning the names on the jail roster one day while bored (one can learn some amazing facts about our Public Safety Building's overcrowded inmates' charges: we have an astounding amount of sex offenders, for one thing. (blech!) Disturbingly high for what it should be per capita.), and I came across the name Wanda Arrington, with a long list of charges below it. She'd been in there quite some time, it seemed.

What sort of witness is this? One with extremely valid ulterior motives, if you ask me. Shed doubt on the integrity of the probation officer and whatever he's accusing the woman of, and all of a sudden it holds much less water than it would coming from a lily-white source.

Unfortunately, what muddied the water further, was the fact that months/years? earlier, Mr. Williams had gone through some personal problems with his then wife, resulting on him being placed on paid leave for a time while the whole mess got straightened out. Stalking charges stemming from a messy breakup was what the gist of it seemed to be. How this affects his credibility on his professional life that much later I'm not sure. Supposedly he agreed to a plea-bargain which, after he completed a series of counseling sessions and passed a test deeming him fit for active duty again, it was all good and behind him. Ha. Those of us who've been involved with these types of things know they're NEVER behind us, not when something comes up that gives the opposing side opportunity to drag the dirty laundry out all over again!

Did Ms. Arrington know about this blot on her supervising officer's record? Perhaps while he was consoling her about her rocky relationship with her boyfriend, he looked to establish some form of rapport by confessing some past problems of his own? We'll never know.

So I said to myself, "Self, does the Press know about this? If so, did they intentionally omit it from their unflattering article about Dave Williams' inglorious departure from IDOC? or was it an innocent oversight?

Hmmm. I would like to think it was mere ignorance (not an uncommon trait in many of the Press' journalists) that was responsible for the omission of Wanda's current residence- plus why she's there- but at the same time, little ole Coeur d'Alene is not immune to the good old boy network that plays many a part in what gets published when and who gets blamed for what.

I just hope that Mr. Williams, a great guy who took his job very seriously from all accounts- and I did speak to many of his former and current (at that time) probationers before reaching the decision that I did- has no problem bouncing back from this grievous attack on his character and that black spot on his resume. Maybe law enforcement isn't an option for him anymore, but I am keeping my fingers crossed and including him in my prayers hoping that perfect job will come along and snap him up, so his talents and honest desire to help people will not go to waste.