Well, well, well ... Chalmers is smoked out.
Chalmers Breaks Silence on LAX Case
"I made a conscious decision at the beginning of that investigation, as chief of police and as this organization's concerned, that we would not actually discussing this case in the media," he said.
WTF! No word on dear ol' mom?!?
On Monday, Baker said he may be keeping close tabs on the lacrosse investigation, but he is qualified to do so based on his background as the assistant city attorney responsible for providing legal advice to the Police Department. Baker denied he was forced into day-to-day oversight of the investigation by the absence of Police Chief Steve Chalmers, who has been on leave attending to his gravely ill mother.
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/439990.html
"I felt that there were individuals who had decided to step up and be vocal and talk about the case. Of course, the district attorney decided that there were certain things he wanted to discuss, and even the city manager had taken the opportunity had taken the opportunity to talk about.
"With that being done, I didn't really think it was a need really to further discuss the case in the media."
"Individuals who had decided to step up and be vocal" who were running for election? Did the DA and City Manager also take "the opportunity" to run police lineups contrary to the the Chalmers General Order 4077?
http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/434410.html
The lineup procedure ran contrary in two fundamental ways to the police department's General Order 4077 on Eyewitness Identification issued in February.
* Policy calls for an independent administrator to run the lineup, not the primary investigator. This avoids any unintentional influence from the investigator.
* The lineup should include five "fillers" -- people who have no connection to the case -- for every suspect, to protect against faulty identification. If an accuser picks a filler photograph, the defense is certain to challenge that witness's reliability.
"Everything that we've seen written in the papers and heard, certainly we've addressed that internally, and we're prepared to address it in court," he said.
I will bet you have seen everything written and heard. Too bad Nifong's sister was unavailable for comment.
"The main thing that we're trying to do is protect the integrity of the investigation, to present a case that is not biased or has not been compromised," Chalmers said. "Our responsibility is to investigate the case, to protect the integrity of the case, and when the time comes, provide the evidence that we've gathered in a court of law to bring about a conviction.
"And I didn't think that that could be done, by actually discussing going tit-for-tat with the media."
What investigation? The (NEGATIVE) DNA samples rushed through labs prior to Nifong's primary? The rush to the Grand Jury prior to Nifong's election? The rush to indict prior to Nifong's election? Appearances suggest a police chief stepped aside for others' political gains.
Where is Gottlieb's report? Still under protection?
How about the cell phone records? Protected?
...and when the time comes, provide the evidence that we've gathered in a court of law to bring about a conviction.
Of course, we can trust this "evidence" has been turned over to the defense.Something missing from this sentence?
"I made a conscious decision at the beginning of that investigation, as chief of police and as this organization's concerned, that we would not actually discussing this case in the media," he said.
Otherwise the article is a fat nothing. Chalmers is coming across as though he's trying to keep his job. Playing nice with every-BODY. He knows something. It's why he went so silent since March. I keep hearing this "Please don't hurt me" message undertext to his quotes in the articles. Was he avoiding potential questions about problems Durham police have had in past in re their involvement with organized prostitution?