Progress Pursues Lying Deputy

In today’s Daily Progress, Reed Williams has followed up on the case of the lying deputy, looking into Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Camblos’ selective enforcement of laws against filing false police reports. Camblos says that ex-Deputy Stephen Shiflett hasn’t been charged because Shiflett hadn’t confessed. Reed Williams found that in there have been 17 incidents of false reports in the last 18 months, with charges being filed in 12 of them. Only 9 of those 12 charges involved confessions from the accused. Interestingly, there was enough evidence that Shiflett was lying for Sheriff Robb to apologize to the black community for Shiflett’s false accusation that that he was shot by a black man, and enough evidence for the county police to declare that Shiflett had lied, but not enough for Camblos to bring charges.

20 Responses to “Progress Pursues Lying Deputy”


  • Yes!

    Way to go Reed. Very intelligent and imaginative use of statistics to bring a few feet to the fire.

    Keep pushing and asking the tough questions – Do I detect some squirming out there?

    Keep talking Camblos, the more you say the odder it becomes. As Alice said "Curiouser and curioser " and just think we have yet to hear from Robb. Perhaps he can clear

    all the confusion in the mind of the public – dare I say "voters"?

  • What the big boys in command are doing, I would imagine, is sitting back with their feet propped up on the desk, smoking a stogie, and saying to each other, "Ahhh. Just give it a week or two. It’ll blow over. And then we’ll never hear about this again from the public or media. Just gotta wait it out."

    Part of their job is to be able to withstand the glare of public scrutiny, rightly or wrongly.

    IMHO.

  • Part of their job is to be able to withstand the glare of public scrutiny, rightly or wrongly.

    That’s not part of their job. Is that on their list of duties? No, but it’s a big statement *you* think it is! And unfortunately, the majority of the population is also so apathetic. That’s how they get away with it. IMHO.

  • Gosh somehow this whole thing became my fault, even though I am FOR prosecuting Shifflett, because there is seemingly enough evidence. You are quite the antagonizer, aren’t you?

    What I was commenting on is what I pictured in my head. JEEZ!!!!!!!!!!

  • My comment still stands… however, although "antagonizing" if A-okay with me, maybe you don’t deserve it. But, as said, I stand by my HO.

  • I personally think it shows insight, not apathy, on my part to realize that the big wigs are just going to sit back and "wait til the whole thing blows over." If you were to "read into" my initial comment a bit more closely, you’d see that I am calling for more/sustained media investigation and public pressure.

    But whatever. I ain’t gettin’ all defensive or nuthin’.

  • “Insight” into what? How to be a politician when the core competency should be… take a pick, law, law enforcement, public safety, good of the people?

    It’s not that you didn’t mean well, it’s that you are so understanding, er, let’s say insightful, with their dishonest ways. *Understanding* is good and all, but sometimes it’s not appropriate, because it encourages forgiveness.

    Who’s the one who said: “Understanding all is to forgive all”? I think it was a female saint or scientist.

  • You clearly just want to antagonize, so that’s okay. I’ll sit this one out.

  • Well, fine. But I’d like to voice my encouragement to Cornelious, Reed Williams and the rest of the conscious community to stay on the scent!!!

  • I don’t believe it — after a year and a half, someone at the Progress has finally managed to please you people!

    Nice work, Reed, for daring to dream the impossible dream.

    And seriously, good story too.

  • Indeed, well done, Reed. I really didn’t think that there was any way that there would be anything further in the Progress without some sort of an event on which to hang another story. I’m pleased to have been wrong. :)

    I hope that a weekly picks up on this now, too.

  • Indie, don’t you know better than to get into a pissing contest with Symp? It keeps going and going and going….

  • Even if the statistics had borne out the claim that Shiflett wasn’t prosecuted because he hadn’t confessed, is anyone else bothered by the message that this sends out?

    Note to all would-be false accusers: you’ll be OK as long as you don’t ‘fess up.

    The criminal justice system’s presumption of innocence without proof of guilt should remain sancrosanct, but it’s not supposed to encourage lying.

  • sorry – should be SACROsanct

  • Jizzmaster –

    Really now, Does the Progress, on a daily basis, please you?

    The question is sincere and not belligerent nor am I trolling for a fight or other contest – only an honest answer to an honest question.

    Thanks

  • Oh, God no. Of course not. Probably not even on a weekly basis.

    Still, I do believe that people in general, and especially on this web site, are too quick to overlook the good work that many reporters at the paper do. On most days, I think there is a story or two in the paper worth commending. So to point out the inevitable sucky stories and add a snarky comment like, oh, I don’t know, "Typical Progress," is just unfair.

    The thing is, I kind of doubted they were going to follow up on this issue too, for pretty much the reason Waldo said: They, like most daily media, tend to spend too much effort on day-to-day stuff and not enough on long-term and/or enterprise.

    But in retrospect, I guess I shouldn’t have doubted. Number one, people there read this site ffairly obsessively (or at least a few of them do, and the rest should). When people here have legitimately good ideas, reporters would be silly not to run with them. And number two, Reed is one of the better reporters at the paper. Not the only very good one, but certainly one of them.

    So to answer your question as honestly as I can: No, of course the Progress doesn’t please me on a daily basis. But that doesn’t mean people should write off all the good stuff that it does do.

  • OK – Thanks for an honest answer. I believe the same – I think I was the first, on this web page –

    to congratulate Reed BUT I think the Progress – all in all – is not a very good newspaper.

  • BUT I think the Progress – all in all – is not a very good newspaper.

    Fine, and that’s because: The publisher is an idiot, the editor is an idiot, and the company that owns the place puts *no* value on quality journalism, they don’t pay enough to hire and keep good people and, finally CHARLOTTESVILLE IS A SMALL MARKET! I wish just as much as you do — probably more, in fact — that there were still quality small papers in this country. But, with literally one or two exceptions, there aren’t. It sucks. I’ve said it before, though, and I’ll say it again. The problems with the Progress aren’t unique to the Progress. They’re the same problems that almost all papers that size have.

    And again, I think that if you’d compare it to other papers OF ITS SIZE (i.e. not the Washington Post), you’d find that the writing and reporting, in general, is actually pretty good. Sad but true: There’s a lot worse out there. Also sad but true: There are plenty of smart, capable people working at the Progress who, besides having to work for incompetents, can’t even get credit from their readers when they do something well.

  • can’t even get credit from their readers when they do something well.

    In most cases, I mean.

  • And again, I think that if you’d compare it to other papers OF ITS SIZE (i.e. not the Washington Post), you’d find that the writing and reporting, in general, is actually pretty good. Sad but true: There’s a lot worse out there.

    Every time I visit some other town, I pick up their daily or (*shudder*) watch their news broadcast. Any city smaller than 100,000 is quite likely to have truly pathetic offerings compared to Charlottesville.

Comments are currently closed.

Sideblog