What’s really going on at the Jefferson Police Department? That’s often difficult to figure out given the secretive nature of its egocentric leadership.
Both Chief Joe Wirthman and his sidekick, assistant chief Gus Backelant, rule with iron fists and broker no dissent.
That leadership by intimidation creates a lot of questionable JPD decisions and fuels numerous rumors.
The JPD is a public agency, the largest in the City of Jefferson with a $1.7 million taxpayer-funded budget. What it does, how its officers act and its internal problems are all of legitimate public interest.
Yet Wirthman and Backelant run the department like a private fiefdom. The response to complaints about a recent police party at Backelant’s house is a case in point.
On the night of Aug. 1, the JPD held its annual party at Backelant’s home on Thornhill Circle in Jefferson. Spouses and children attended, along with off-duty officers. According to city manager John Ward, it was a “nice family event where employees were able to get together and socialize away from work.” He said the only noise from the party came from children playing in the pool and adults laughing.
But two callers to the Jackson County 911 center that night and others who were in the neighborhood paint a different picture.
At 8:18 p.m. that evening, the Jackson County 911 Center received a phone call from a man complaining about the party. He said he and his wife had been out walking and passed by 187 Thornhill Circle where they said people were outside “raising sand, whooping and hollering and carrying on.” He said the group “looked about drunk” and that cars were parked along the subdivision street on both sides, including police cars. (See first call report
here)
The man suggested that someone look into the matter, but refused to give his name.
JPD officer Darrell Johnson was subsequently dispatched by 911 to Backelant’s house. He arrived at 8:27 p.m. and left within two minutes.
At 8:42 p.m., a second call came into the 911 Center about the party. The person on this call said officers were “partying and urinating in public and still being too loud,” according to the 911 report. (See second call report
here)
This time, JPD officer James McNatt was dispatched to the scene. McNatt asked the dispatcher who the call came from and speculated that it must have come from former JPD chief Darren Glenn, who lives in the same subdivision. (Glenn said he wasn’t at home at the time and that he had nothing to do with the calls.)
After McNatt arrived at the party, officer Johnson radioed back to the 911 Center at 8:54 p.m. and told the dispatcher he had been instructed by Wirthman that no JPD officer would respond to any further complaints about the party unless the person calling agreed to meet with an officer.
The 911 dispatcher said that decision was up to the JPD, but that any further complaints would have to be dispatched anyway.
No other calls came into 911 that night, but one neighbor said he later saw two people who appeared intoxicated leave the party, stopping a short distance away to throw up in the street.
There are a couple of questions about this event, but the main concern is Wirthman’s demand that anyone complaining about the party had to meet with officers or otherwise, calls to 911 would be ignored.
Clearly, Wirthman crossed a line with such a command. Officers often respond to such complaints without asking to meet with the person who called. Wirthman’s demand was an effort to intimidate the callers simply because it was his department being complained about.
Few would begrudge officers letting their hair down for a few hours at a party. But the holding of a large police party that apparently included some rather heavy drinking in a high-profile subdivision makes one wonder about the wisdom of the department’s leadership.
And it begs this question: If a similar party had been held by someone else and received 911 complaints about noise and people urinating in public, would Wirthman and the JPD have been so dismissive of the complaints?
Does the chief believe his department is above the law?
Chris Chapman
Maybe the truth hurts?
Mike Buffington, editor
Dr. Kevin Smith and this should be on the tapes as well;
has anyone asked Dr Smith about his call to 911?
I hold Police Officers and Firefighters in the very highest regard because they generally deserve it. But over-stepping boundaries that your average Jefferson Joe doesn't get the chance to do is plain wrong.
And it doesn't have anything to do with whether Mike decided to write about it or not. If he hadn't, would that make it okay?
Editor, The Jackson Herald
Mike:
The anonymous accusations made in the first '911 CAD incident' concerning: "raising sand, whooping and hollering and carrying on" at 8:18pm, 1 August 2008, at 187 Thornhill Circle simply do not hold water. I was outside my home and walking my dog down Melvin and Thornhill Circle when the first 911 CAD incident report was apparently made. What I saw and heard does not corroborate what the anonymous caller apparently grossly exaggerated or spoke untruthfully about. To me, it looked like a typical innocuous gathering of friends and/or coworkers that included a number of children swimming in the backyard pool. When I again went outside later that night with my dog at around 9:30pm, the vehicles that had previously been parked on the street for the gathering were gone.
Best regards,
Eric A. Nicolaus
Arabian / Persian Gulf Veteran (1999 - 2001)
Regards,
Eric
Mike Buffington, editor
Editor, The Jackson Herald
Dear Mike:
I contacted several of my neighbors who live directly next to and across from the gathering that resulted in your editorial: "Page 4A, The Jackson Herald, 13 August 2008 - "Line Crossed in JPD Party Response"." One of the neighbors living directly next to the gathering actually saw portions of the party from his backyard. He has forwarded his comments to you - directly - via email. He was also kind enough to forward me a copy if you need it. I assume you will post his comments verbatim on your website and in your paper. They describe a much different view then what you printed in your editorial. It is becoming evident that the editorial you wrote is at best based on information that is highly suspect. There are now two eye witnesses, with real names, to the gathering who have stated that the anonymous information passed to the 911 operator was contradictory, at best.
Best regards,
Eric A. Nicolaus
Arabian / Persian Gulf Veteran (1999 - 2001)
Disabled Veteran
Mike
totally obsurd and obviously senseless. Don't put
yourself in the same classification as a police officer.
There is absolutely no comparison in the scenerio you
provided. I believe when you write statements without
an eyewitness it is call "defamation", or even "Slander".
I'm not sure but aren't there laws against that?
For those who may be fooled by you, any comment that has a negative approach to Mike Buffington did not come from me. All things being fair I have also given Chief Wirthman due props on a couple of occasions.
I was VERY sick last week with the FLU and trying to sleep.
There was an emergency situation in our neighborhood that I wont go into here.
The Jefferson police were not willing to help me but went on and on about how I did not come outside to "meet with them in person"....
We have visited them and filed many reports on this same exact situation for 2 YEARS. Paper trail and all....
Funny how ALL of that paperwork is missing now?
Some as recent as a month ago????
Just now many times does the Jefferson police "need me to meet with them" to finally enforce the Jefferson Law? Just how much paperwork are they going to lose?
Also the Jefferson Police need to realize that sometimes neighbors are intimidated and need to make anonymous calls!
I am appalled at the heads of this department after speaking extensively with them. Their take on the law SHOCKS me.
I listed to the free scanner listed here at this site last week.
I found it amazing that anonymous calls were allowed in other neighborhoods?
No officer had to meet with those callers?
Those situations were a lot less serious than this also?
How about the Jefferson Police "meeting" with the law breaker?
Guess thats too much for the Jefferson Police to handle?
It's a real shame also that newcomers are moving to nice Jefferson neighborhoods and destroying them. I guess they know the police don't enforce the ordinances anyway?
WHY are we paying these people?
WHAT are we getting for our $?
WHY are these folks fired and better people found?
This is an embarrassment to this lovely town!
The facts simply don't fit here. There are only two anonymous and highly suspect calls made - both circumvented the 9-1-1 system. A cell phone number would show up if going through 9-1-1. The second anonymous call gave a false name while still circumventing the 9-1-1 system. There are at least two eye witnesses who saw what they saw and were not invited or part of the gathering - they saw things much differently then the highly suspect anonymous calls Mike used to support his editorial. I'm sure Mike can now do his homework and probably write another couple more editorials after he obtains the available 9-1-1 transcripts - I certainly look forward to reading and hearing them! BTW: Your welcome. It was an honor to serve my country - and make it back almost in one piece.
Best regards,
Eric A. Nicolaus
Arabian / Persian Gulf Veteran (1999 - 2001)
Disabled Veteran
I am truly fortunate - I have really great neighbors where I live on Thornhill Circle. They are all friendly, helpful, likeable, and respectful of one another. Gus is definitely one of them. I'm not so sure that the big story was that 9-1-1 was told not to respond - I'll wait for the 9-1-1 transcripts. I'd also like to know what other JPD resources were being utilized during the period in question. Example: Was every unit on coffee break or was there a critical accident, burglary, robbery, or murder investigation going on? Mike doesn't say in his opinion and I don't know. I learned allot from previously performing administrative, civil, and criminal investigations. There are three sides to every story: yours, mine, and the truth. Finally, having written, approved, and followed departmental and interdepartmental procedures for the USCG and local law enforcement agencies, this is the first-ever time I have heard where standard policy for E 9-1-1 was not to have the sister agency respond to a call where an officer of the same jurisdiction is involved. The initial highly suspect and anonymous call that apparently bypassed the 9-1-1 taping did ID the house as a JPD employee. This isn't the Sheriff's or JPD's fault, maybe it's just never come up before? For example, if a Sheriff's Dept deputy was involved in an accident, another agency would respond, i.e. highway patrol.
Best regards,
Eric A. Nicolaus
Arabian / Persian Gulf Veteran (1999 - 2001)
Disabled Veteran
I don't drink alcoholic beverages.
Best regards,
Eric A. Nicolaus
Arabian / Persian Gulf Veteran (1999 - 2001)
Disabled Veteran
great comeback.
what are you, 12?
and it is YOU'RE not YOUR.
1st caller: “raising sand, whooping and hollering and carrying on.” and "looked About drunk".
Please read 9.5.5 "Noise performance standards" for the city of Jefferson Quick breakdown. unamplified voice is EXEMPT from the standard(9.5.6 (b)). As for the about drunk....Isn't Backelant's backyard fenced in??? How can they look about drunk from behind a fence?
Second Caller:
"partying and urinating in public and still being too loud"
Partying...Isnt that what you do at a party? Arn't even police officers allowed to party.
Urinating in public...Oh yea I can see that happening at the bosses house. Quick way to loose your job dont you think.
Still being to loud....Please refer to 9.5.6 (b)
P.S "Still" being to loud tells me that it was the same caller...
2 intoxicated people leaving the party stopping to throw up. but this is said after "no other calls came into the 911 center" so where did this come from?
Included some rather heavy drinking...sounds like speculation to me Mr. Buffington.
Not to respond unless the caller will meet with the officers.....if the police are called to a complaint and they find no problems and are called again and find no problems the third time they are going to want to meet with the caller to find out what the complaint is.
runs the police department with an iron fist.....if that means 8 new police cars on the street and 4 more comming this year, comming in under budget last year, having a full staff of officers, implimenting park and walk for officers to get out of the cars and meet citizens, updating the computers and report system and the list goes on.
As one person put it "most of the officers and staff at JPD can not wait for the day they will be free of the wirthman and backelant comedy show"....Then why dont the staff and officers that dont like it there PACK THEIR BAGS AND LEAVE.
If you break it down you end up with Twisted truths and not much of a case.
Oh. one more thing If the people calling didnt think they were getting any results Why didn't they call and ask for a deputy to respond....my opinion...they knew nothing was going on and didn't want the Sheriff's office to verify it.
oh...so Buffington can Spin it his way but when someone else points out a different view of it that view gets questioned. But his View doesn't.
What makes his View More valid than mine?
whats the matter dont like that every point CAN be explained with a VALID explination.
you give yourself away so much...noise performance standards...come on ....look up public drunk.."within public view" that happens when you stagger out from the "fenced back yard" fall in the truck and throw up in not only your drive but also street. I don't think any of them consider you their boss, being you’re not certified. I have lived here all my life 12 years ago there was 4 cars on the road patrolling. I don't think the police dept had any computers in the building or I know the cars didn't. The evidence was kept in a closet and officers made 7.50 an hour...I know I was one. I had my differences with the past administration so I left. Or was made to leave but he always backed his men when they were right. The list goes on and on as you say but you were not around here then, so you are just going on what other people tell you .just as you have been giving people a hard time for...grow up...pass the Academy ...act like a true officer and maybe you will get some of that respect you try to demand.
P.S. you were told not to wite anything to here or the paper so you can't even follow an order
IF you had any credibility up to that point, you just lost it. Stupid thing to say.
Too late...
I live in the Preserve. It's a sleepy little subdivision that hasn't had much going on since '05 when some graduating seniors threw the pool furniture in the pool. Maybe there have been some parties, but most of us would never know it -- you hardly find lights on after 10:00 p.m.
I read the paper every week... I get my copy on Thursday, but have been known to join the groupies on Wednesday night, quarters in hand, to get Mike's latest take on issues. Much of the time, Mike and I are on the same side of an issue. Sometimes, though, I wince at how hard he hits at people/events that go unintentionally poorly. Remember how he tore into the schools when they had that scheduling problem some time ago?
Well...this is one of those times when I'm scratching my head, going "What the....?"
"Callers" (plural according to Mike) decide independently to call 911 in such a way that their identity is hidden and complain, approximately 30 minutes apart about a party. The 'second' caller uses the phrase "and they're STILL too loud". The Mike I know couldn't overlook that. The use of "still too loud" tells us that there is either just one caller, or it's two callers working together.
By the way, why is the 'Name' redacted on the second call documentation? Do we know the name of the second caller?
Second, the street Backelant lives on is a semi circle that empties from each side on to a major street in the subdivision. If 'caller 1' were walking and became so offended by noise/behavior coming from the Backelant house that he needed to call 911, he certainly would not have had to walk by the house AGAIN to collaborate with or impersonate 'caller 2'. He seems to have worked pretty hard at becoming offended.
Folks in this subdivision tend to live from the back of their houses... nearly all have back decks/patios and most have walk out lower levels. You can't even tell if anyone is home most of the time just looking at the front.
Since this party was centered around the pool and Backelant's walkout lower level, it takes a big stretch of the imagination to think that folks walked from the privacy of the back yard to the front or sides of the home and pee'd in front of passersby. Could it have happened? Maybe... but certainly not likely.
As far as the 911/police response... how many times do we want the police to respond to an anonymous -- i.e. crank call -- at $4.00/gallon of gas before we say, "Sure Bud, we'll go out and visit a party we've just visited twice in the last 30 minutes and found nothing wrong." "But do us a favor, will ya, and meet us there so you can tell us what the heck you're seeing/hearing that is so darn offensive!"
Come to think of it, I don't think Mike entertains or prints anonymous letters to the editor. I think he'll print comments from an anonymous contributor, but I don't think he will do that unless he's furnished the contributor's name so facts can be verified.
How 'bout it Mike? Correct me on this. How much credence do you give to anonymous contributors?
Then there's the matter of people leaving the party having had so much to drink that they must stop within minutes to vomit. Hmmmm....
men the size of most JPD officers would have to drink beer at warp speed to ingest enough alcohol at a four or five hour party to vomit while exiting. Might puke the next morning... but probably not that night. Don't know what that's all about, since some of the posts insist that it really happened. My guess is that it didn't.
I'm breaking my #1 rule in writing this post: "If it stinks, don't stir it", but this one got to me. It's the unfairness of it all. If I were to read in a public instrument that Mike Buffington was "about drunk"; pee'ing in someone's front yard; and vomiting on the street, "ACCORDING TO AN ANONYMOUS AND CAREFULLY DISGUISED" caller, I would give it absolutely no credence whatsoever! Does that mean it could not be true? ...of course not! But the 'reasonable man' test would require that these accusations be verified through actual first hand accounts before relaying them to others as 'truth'.
Mike, you didn't give Backelant the accord you would expect for you or any member of your family. You sunk to the Jerry Springer level and that is soooo far beneath "an award winning journalist".
Why? ...I still can't figure out why you did this... I can't come up with the "What's in it for you..."
Maybe you were covering Arcade or Pendergrass? Who knows? But, I do know one thing, you set in your office silent, when you could have shouted from the heavens the corruption going on in the “JPD.” But, you didn’t. Why, Mr. Editor?
What about when the old Assistant Chief was taking officers to Downtown Athens when they were on duty? Who knows what you were doing. This is all crazy.
12 to 8 Mr. Editor. Your boy wonder made it by 4 votes. People forget that!
I'll keep my comments brief here, but I'll bet you've stirred up a hornets nest again. My bet is that folks around here have alot more respect for Darren Glenn than for you! I'm sure the next string of comments will be interesting.
incidents....It's almost like you are Darren Glenn himself.
It was all over the Athens Banner Herald, but nothing
here. Why was that? I believe the officer working was
office Green, ACC.