Minton-McNeill is accused of shoving Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department officer Emily Perkins, who, along with other IMPD officers, responded to a 911 call that the councilwoman placed from her home Sunday. Perkins fell and suffered a minor wrist injury during the incident.
According to a police report, Minton-McNeill, who wanted a man removed from her house, shouted profanities at officers and accused them of racism for not meeting her demands. She also, according to the report, told the police to contact high-ranking officers and top city officials and tried to hand the officers her council business cards . . .
But Minton-McNeill's refusal on Monday to answer reporters' questions about the incident is troubling. Also disappointing is council Democrats' decision to conduct a closed-door meeting to discuss the arrest. Indianapolis residents deserve to hear from Minton-McNeill her version of what happened, whether she regrets anything she did or said, and how she plans to proceed. The secretive, ask-me-no-questions approach that she has thus far adopted is unacceptable given that she serves in public office, especially one that has budgetary and policy oversight for IMPD.
The council's Democratic leaders also need to explain how they plan to address the situation. So far, they've rallied around Minton-McNeill, but they have a larger responsibility to the community to ensure that this matter is handled with fairness for all involved, including the IMPD officers.
Democratic members hurt themselves last year in mishandling then-council President Monroe Gray's ethical problems. They need to respond this time in a manner that clearly shows they're placing the public's best interests above personal and partisan concerns.
A serious accusation has been made against an officeholder. Those involved can't hide behind a shield of no comment.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Star: "No Comment" From McNeil-Minton Won't Cut It
A Star editorial today takes aim at City-County Councilor Doris Minton-McNeil's arrest for battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting law enforcement and her terse response to questions about it, "No comment." The editorial also whacks council Democrats for holding a behind-closed-doors meeting with the arrested councilor. Here's part of what it says:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Well, obviously, you don't understand the process!
1) First, the democrats have to figure out exactly why it was the republicans fault.
2) Then, the democrats have to figure out why it was the fault of the police.
3) Then the democrats have to find out why it was George Bush's fault that Doris didn't get the help she requested.
4) Then the democrats have to figure out why Mitch Daniels wouldn't provide Doris with the proper medications she needed.
5) Then the democrats have to figure out how to keep from blaming Frank Anderson for the "pedofile with a knife" that was running loose in Doris's house.
As you can see, this is a long, involved process, and takes time!
Well, that's not gonna happen.
Rule #1 in that group of folks is 'Gentlemen, we have to protect our phoney baloney jobs.'
She won't comment, but I will: Any ELECTED OFFICIAL who is drunk, disorderly, shouting loud racist ideas and words from her lowered inhibitions, and URINATING on herself does not need a day in court to be told she is UNFIT FOR ELECTED OFFICE!
Oh, by the way, she is in the position of an elected official, but please remember she was APPOINTED by the Democrats...
She needs to resign immediately, or the council needs to boot her off.
Don't forget she works for IPS as an administrative assistant. Does this foul mouthed racist have contact with children? I work for the city, and guilty or not I would already be in anger management and racial diversity training. Why is doing the right thing always the last thought?
Scary thought: If this was already their best-qualified for filling the seat, what's the replacement going to be like?
I hope none of you ever get arrested. You will find that oftentimes what is contained in the police report is far from what occurred and even some times what the police later said occurred. She is smart by not commenting. If she denied it, would you believe her? she has crimianl charges pending against ehr and if felonies are involved could be facing serious charges that can affect her for the rest of her life. I have seen police officers get angry when poeple say I am not going to talk to you any longer. The last I reviewed the law she can be as drunk as she wants (if true) when she is at home. If she urinated on herself there can be many explanations such as the polcie were mad and wouldn't let her use the bathroom. If I were her attorney I would tell her to say NO COMMENT. The news media is not her friend.
BRAVO!!!
Concerned Taxpayer said...
Well, obviously, you don't understand the process!
1) First, the democrats have to figure out exactly why it was the republicans fault.
2) Then, the democrats have to figure out why it was the fault of the police.
3) Then the democrats have to find out why it was George Bush's fault that Doris didn't get the help she requested.
4) Then the democrats have to figure out why Mitch Daniels wouldn't provide Doris with the proper medications she needed.
5) Then the democrats have to figure out how to keep from blaming Frank Anderson for the "pedofile with a knife" that was running loose in Doris's house.
As you can see, this is a long, involved process, and takes time!
7:45 AM EST
Post a Comment