After dark on the evening of Jan. 10, Sheriff's Deputy Dale Towery was driving north on US-93 in a county cruiser when he noted that cattle were loose on the highway. He reported this fact on the radio but failed to stop to warn other motorists. As a result, two motorists struck cows a few minutes later. Shortly after that, traveling south at a high rate of speed, Towery himself smashed into one of the same cows. His cruiser was totaled at taxpayer expense, and the cow was hamburger.
Is this guy dumb, or what?
A number of questions remain unanswered:
In the accident report, Towery says he struck a black cow while traveling "code" (with flashing lights) at approximately 80 mph. The location was US-93 about 4 miles north of Caliente, 376 feet south of mile marker 98. Towery says he swerved to avoid one cow, only to hit another that he didn't see. The cow was thrown a considerable distance, and the car careened off the road 262 feet from the area of impact.
What the report did not say was that Towery had passed the same location just a few minutes before. This was confirmed by at least two citizens listening to the Sheriff's radio frequency who heard Towery report that there were cows in the road. This area is normally fenced, and there should have been no cattle on the highway. Since the primary role of the Sheriff's Department is public safety, it would have seemed appropriate for Towery to turn on his dome lights to warn motorists and stay in the area until the hazard was resolved. Isn't that what the County pays him for? Instead he left the area and continued north.
A few minutes later, first one motorist, then another, traveling in the opposite direction, struck cows in the road at the same place Towery had just passed. One of these drivers went to a nearby house and had the owner call the Sheriff's Department to inform them of the accident and the need to clear the cows from the road. The caller clearly told the dispatcher that no one was injured. Towery at this point was several miles north. Upon hearing of the accident from the dispatcher, he turned around and proceeded to the scene at a high rate of speed. If his own statement says he was going 80 MPH, we wonder how fast he was really going.
This is where the discrepancies begin. No injuries had been reported in the original accidents, and Towery had previously passed this hazard and saw no need to stop, so why was he now proceeding to the scene at 80+?
The accident report claims he was proceeding to an "unknown injury accident," but no injury was ever reported--that is, until Towery knocked himself silly in his own cow collision. (He was dazed, but suffered no serious injury.)
Unconfirmed reports from more than one source say that Towery was in a hurry because he thought he could give someone a ticket for speeding, and he had reportedly said something to that effect on the air. One of the drivers who first hit the cows feels that she was the target of Towery's interest. Since none of the citizen's listening to the Sheriff's frequency recorded the broadcasts, the only way to know what was really said is to play back the Sheriff's own tapes of the radio broadcasts, which should still be available.
The Independent asks: When will the Sheriff make these tapes public?
Since almost four weeks have gone by since the accident, the Sheriff ought to have had plenty of time to investigate the matter and come to a conclusion. What is that conclusion? Did the officer act with proper professional judgment in this incident? If not, what actions have been taken in response.
Dahl Bradfield has told inquiring parties that the matter is under investigation by the Highway Patrol, but this is wrong. NHP officers prepared a report, but their investigation was closed on the same day it began. Inquiries to the NHP in Las Vegas confirm that there is no active investigation by the Highway Patrol of this matter, and they treated it no differently than any other highway accident.
Still unresolved is whether Towery acted properly within his duties as a Sheriff's Deputy, which is a matter to be resolved by the Sheriff, not the Highway Patrol. Unfortunately, Sheriff Bradfield hates to make decisions like this, falling back whenever possible on his three favorite excuses:
(a) "We have no choice."
(b) "It's not our responsibility."
(c) "It's not my fault."
It is Dahl's style to forgive and forget the transgressions of his deputies--again and again--and he won't make any unpleasant decisions as long as he can cover himself with one of the above. Now, the Independent says, "Enough is enough." Towery is a bad cop, and the only reason he has remained on the force to keep making these stupid mistakes is Dahl's inertia.
One incident, however, has multiple witnesses and an official complaint that remains unresolved. It happened about two years ago at the rodeo grounds in Caliente. At about 8 or 9 pm, Some local youths happened upon Towery with a woman in his cruiser while Towery was supposedly on duty. Although there is no direct proof that bodily fluids were exchanged, this was the distinct impression of the witnesses. Consider this: What is an officer on duty doing in this hidden location with a woman in his car? Did they go there to talk? Okay, then what were they talking about that was related to Towery's duties on the county time? Was he interrogating her as a confidential informant?
This incident in itself did not generate a complaint, but Towery's later behavior did. One of the young witnesses felt that Towery was harassing him because of what he saw that night, and this resulted in a complaint to the Sheriff by his parents and another party. Dahl Bradfield and Gary Davis investigated--which is like having Laurel and Hardy on the case. They interviewed witnesses and the woman involved, and in the process made sure the woman knew who had made the complaint. The woman called one of the complaining parties in blind rage. She said, between the expletives, that it wasn't anyone's business what happened that night.
Indeed, it isn't anyone's business but theirs--except when one of the parties is on duty and the county is paying for it.
No one has ever heard the results of that investigation, so perhaps this is an appropriate time for the Sheriff to report. Is Towery a good cop or a bad cop? Is he competent or incompetent? If he isn't both good AND competent, then what is he doing on the county payroll?
The Independent asks: If our county has less the 1% of the violent crime rate of North Las Vegas, why does it have over twice as many officers: 1.5 per 1000 in NLV vs. about 4 per 1000 here?
Can the Sheriff take credit for our low crime rate? Not exactly. If our rate is low, it is because this is a stable community where everyone knows everyone else and serious crime rarely happens anyway.
We keep our sources confidential. All we need to know is the truth.
http://www.ufomind.com/lincoln
New material is being added every few weeks.
