the Fort Mitchell Police Department?

 

From the article:

 

Commonwealth's Attorney Rob Sanders said in the investigation of the boosters association is being handled by Kentucky State Police to ensure an independent investigation.

 

Link to the story again

Would such a crime normally be handled by the local police?

Would such a crime normally be handled by the local police?

 

Absolutely!

Then you raise a good question. Maybe (pure speculation here) they felt the Ft Mitchell police were too close to the situation. What else could it be?

Then you raise a good question. Maybe (pure speculation here) they felt the Ft Mitchell police were too close to the situation. What else could it be?

 

There should be no such thing as "too close to the situation."

 

To me it screams either one or both of the Kenton County Commonwealth Attorney or Beechwood doesn't trust the Fort Mitchell Police Department to objectively and vigorously investigate the case.

There should be no such thing as "too close to the situation."

 

To me it screams either one or both of the Kenton County Commonwealth Attorney or Beechwood doesn't trust the Fort Mitchell Police Department to objectively and vigorously investigate the case.

 

You said "should."

 

I'm speculating that they think they are.

There should be no such thing as "too close to the situation."

 

To me it screams either one or both of the Kenton County Commonwealth Attorney or Beechwood doesn't trust the Fort Mitchell Police Department to objectively and vigorously investigate the case.

 

Or perhaps the Ft. Mitchell Police asked the State Police to handle it? When does the state police take the lead on an investigation and how does that get decided? If someone other than the police asked the state police to investigate, I have to believe the state police would discuss the case with Ft. Mitchell police. What is the protocol?

Or perhaps the Ft. Mitchell Police asked the State Police to handle it? When does the state police take the lead on an investigation and how does that get decided? If someone other than the police asked the state police to investigate, I have to believe the state police would discuss the case with Ft. Mitchell police. What is the protocol?

 

I am sure the State Police working a case can come about several different ways. If Fort Mitchell asked KSP to investigate the case then I think Rob Sanders' choice of words was very poor.

 

In general terms to answer your question KSP would investigate when someone came to them and requested it. Additionally, I assume they would have to provide KSP with a compelling argument as to why they were needed over the locals (Fort Mitchell in this case).

Why don't the Kenton County Commonwealth Attorney and Beechwood have confidence in the Fort Mitchell Police Department?

 

Because they know the Ft. Mitchell cops are too busy patrolling the coffee maker at the Ft. Mitchell Marathon station and pulling over cars that don't look like they "belong" in Ft. Mitchell?

 

I'm gonna go with straight-up incompetence. As the Commonwealth Attorney and a Ft. Mitchell Volunteer Firefighter, I would assume Sanders knows this all too well.

Fort Mitchell has a fine PD! Just as many other cities in NKY! I am sure they are qualified for this and any job, but maybe people inside the PD and/or city are close to the accused? Close to the school?

There should be no such thing as "too close to the situation."

 

To me it screams either one or both of the Kenton County Commonwealth Attorney or Beechwood doesn't trust the Fort Mitchell Police Department to objectively and vigorously investigate the case.

 

I agree, regardless, it is a bad situation though.

Perhaps a "relationship" exists between the Slusher family and the FMPD and the FMPD thought it would be best to bring in the KSP and remove themselves from the investigation to prevent any conflict of interest. Pure speculation on my part, but there is precedent for this situation.

Fort Mitchell has a fine PD! Just as many other cities in NKY! I am sure they are qualified for this and any job, but maybe people inside the PD and/or city are close to the accused? Close to the school?

 

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that one. From my experience growing up in Fort Mitchell (and from my friends and family as well) I can say confidently that Fort Mitchell Police, as a whole, are a group of nitpicking, under-stimulated Barney Fifes.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that one. From my experience growing up in Fort Mitchell (and from my friends and family as well) I can say confidently that Fort Mitchell Police, as a whole, are a group of nitpicking, under-stimulated Barney Fifes.

LOL, You are going to judge a PD on experience as a teen? LOL, EVERY kid alive thought the PD in their area was a pain in the rear. People get upset if the PD "nitpicks", then they get upset when they are not thorough enough for them. I lived in the area all my life, I see them as I said in my other post!

LOL, You are going to judge a PD on experience as a teen? LOL, EVERY kid alive thought the PD in their area was a pain in the rear. People get upset if the PD "nitpicks", then they get upset when they are not thorough enough for them. I lived in the area all my life, I see them as I said in my other post!

 

Guess which of these events isn't true:

 

• A) Fort Mitchell police officer stopped and questioned a 11-year old for taking his trash out to the street late at night. Seemed "suspicious". Officer then proceeded to get out of the patrol car, and walk said 11-year old to the front door of the house, ring the doorbell, and then question the parents as to whether or not "they were aware that their son was out so late".
  
• B) Fort Mitchell police officer pulled a gun on a 22 year old for "prowling suspiciously" in the backyard of his parents' house. Said 22 year old had, in fact, gotten home at 1:00am, and was turning off and reeling up the hose after his father had accidentally left the sprinkler run.
  
• C) Fort Mitchell police officer pulled over a 20 year old resident for turning left out of a street with a sign reading, "No left turns during the hours of 7:30am-8:30am, or 2:00pm-3:00pm". It was noon. Same police officer pulled over the same resident under the same circumstances TWO MORE TIMES over the next three months. On the third occasion, the officer actually wrote up a ticket for insubordination, after resident was standoffish for being pulled over three times for the same bogus charge. Charge was thrown out in court, as the police officer had no cause to stop the resident in the first place.
  
• D) Two Fort Mitchell police officers stopped and temporarily detained 3 teenage "suspects" who were walking down Dixie Highway after one of the officers they saw an empty plastic baggie laying on the ground on the sidewalk where they had passed. "Suspects" were stopped and searched for drugs, relating to the "paraphernalia" located on the ground by the officers. The baggie did not belong to the teenagers, and contained cheese-cracker crumbs. This was confirmed by the second officer, who arrived upon request to provide backup.
  
• E) A 25 year old Elsmere resident was drinking at a bar in Covington. Resident, realizing he was not able to drive, hailed a taxi, and asked if it would be okay to stop at the PNC Bank in Expressway Plaza on Dixie Highway so he could withdraw cash to pay the cab fare. The taxi driver approved. When the Elsmere resident stepped out of the taxi at the bank, a Fort Mitchell police officer pulled into the space next to the taxi, walked up, and questioned the gentleman as to what he was doing. Sensing that the subject was intoxicated, the officer administered a field sobriety test, and arrested the subject for public intoxication, also dis-allowing said subject to pay for his cab ride. Suspect was jailed overnight and charged with public intoxication, and failure to pay for services rendered. Both charges were thrown out in court.
  
• F) None of the above.