NAACP Investigating Lying Deputy Case

The NAACP is concerned about Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Camblos’ decision not to prosecute lying ex-deputy Stephen Shiflett, after Shiflett claimed that he’d been shot by a black man and Albemarle Sheriff Edgar Robb declaring the shooting a “hate crime.” When it became clear that Shiflett had invented the story, Robb apologized to the black community, but neither Robb nor Camblos (whose offices are just a few feet apart from each other, incidentally) pursued an investigation of what had really happened. The Charlottesville chapter of the NAACP has launched an inquiry as to why Shiflett was never charged, saying that they “are concerned about all issues that might be indicative of some impropriety or injustice.” Reed Williams has the story in today’s Progress.

19 Responses to “NAACP Investigating Lying Deputy Case”

  • The good news is that Robb has two competitors in the Albemarle Sheriff’s race, from a pair of Republicans (running as independents), so voters that are becoming aware of the situation in the sheriff’s office have options available to them. I don’t know much about his opponents, but I don’t think that either of them have actually been convicted of a crime, so they should be OK by Robb.

    The shame is that nobody is running for commonwealth’s attorney in the county to replace Camblos. We’re just starting to see that Camblos may have some sort of a hand in this, and if all of this is properly investigated, I speculate that we’ll see Camblos’ actions (or lack thereof) as equally damnedable as Robb’s.

    What I find particularly frustrating is that, apparently, Albemarle Democrats didn’t even nominate any of the Dems that wanted to run. This is what happens when parties don’t put forward candidates in every election — opportunities are missed and, ultimately, the voters lose out.

  • I am voting for Robb just make you guys mad

  • "I am voting for Robb just make you guys mad"

    You have so little respect for the responsibility of voting, that you would really vote for somebody just to make somebody else mad? I don’t care who you vote for, but that’s nuts…

  • What’s amazing is that Shiflett was hired in the first place after what happened in Louisa County. That incident was responsible for a $500,000 judgement (later reduced) for his actions.

    In Prince George’s County (Maryland), a lawyer recently has won an accumulated $6.5 million against police brutality cases in that county.*

    What’s to say that any of these men might sue Albemarle County for being picked up on the basis of Shiflett’s statements? Robb himself could be even more involved because of his stance that this was a hate crime, picking up black men as suspects, and in generally hiring a loose cannon like Shiftlett.

    (And I would support them suing them. If they hadn’t an airtight alibi, where would they be right now? For all we know, the fact that they had an airtight alibi pointed to Shiflett’s inconsistencies. Unless, of course, there is other evidence of inconsistency besides the story.)

    That doesn’t strike me as a very fiscally responsible situation and perhaps that is why the Commonwealth’s Attorney & Robb are so tight lipped.


    Vote for who you want to, "ImDaMan1-3" but consider the fiscal implications of this situation. (And don’t blame them for wanting to sue the police; blame the police for not following smart hiring practices in the first place. And, ask yourself, would you really mind having to account for your whereabouts on the basis of a less than honest policeman.)

  • I always like voting for the guy who the ‘majority’ doesn’t like. I feel it is more of a disservice trying to nick pick someone just because he isn’t in your party. On both sides of the fence that applies.

  • No justifying your statement now! You said you were "voting for Robb just make you guys mad." That’s all you need to say and it’s all you can say now. Your comments pretty much have lost all integrity from here on since you made that juvenile, passive-agressive comment.

  • Remember last year, when kids were attacking students because they ‘looked white’. Isn’t that a hate crime. Oh I recall everyone made a hash hash about that. Even though the kids admit openly that was their main reason for the attacks. Granted David Duke of the KKK wasn’t the best choice to point this out.

    I hate the term hate crime. It only applies to the hetro, single, white male. If we attack anyone, then it is a hate crime.

  • Nick pick? It’s nit-pick dammit, as in picking nits from hair, nits being the egg sacs of lice. I have plenty of spare dictionaries and would be more than happy to send you one if you’d use it.

    On a related note, Waldo, could you get a spell-check on this thing? My faith in humanity plummets every time I am forced to wonder if I’m talking to a tween.

  • Sheriff Robb called this a hate crime because he believed someone attacked a law enforcement officer. The law enforcement officer said that a black man shot at him. This is how the term hate crime got introduced into this situation.

    Your point about hate crims being applied to the hetero (note the spelling), single, white male is laughable as the deputy in question is at least a white male and who Robb declared the victim of a hate crime.

    Whatever happened in Charlottesville is over now. I’m not getting into discussing that as it’s been done. It was under the jurisdiction of the city, not the county.

    But the discussion NOW is about Ed Robb, Jim Camblos and Shiflett. The NAACP is questioning what happened because there are too many unanswered questions. So let’s stick with the discussion about ALBEMARLE COUNTY.

  • The difference between these two crimes? I’ll tell you. In one case, there was a crime. In this case, nobody knows what the hell happened, because Robb and Camblos ain’t talking.

    If you’ve got some sort of information indicating that a crime against Deputy Shiflett took place (a hate crime or otherwise), then I suggest you call the police and let them know.

  • Which one of your multiple personalities is talking here?

  • I am gonna vote for Robb too since it DID make you mad! HA!!

  • Remember–Robb called this a "hate crime". He never said that it was a race-related hate crime. He just called it a hate crime because someone (allegedly) took a shot at a police officer. I remember watching the news that night at 11 when he was on there all pissed off saying this was a hate crime.

    At that moment, I’m sure he still thought an actual shooting took place. Maybe he used a term that wasn’t politically correct since it is always referred to in the white on black crimes. In my opinion, a hate crime can be whatever you want it to be. If I go down to Blacksburg this weekend and beat up Waldo (not that I will) because I think he is a liberal, then that technically could be a hate crime. (because through an investigation, you would find that I don’t think too much of liberals)

    Robb said something in the heat of the moment that the NAACP should stay out of. But, they should investigate the other parts of the investigation, including the reasons that Camblos ain’t talkin’.

  • I’m not mad… I don’t get mad at people who are clearly fools and are intellectually-challenged. I just pity people like yourself. You can’t help it. You don’t know any better.

  • well, we the ‘intellectually-challenged’ are the majority, so HA!

  • 2! I lost the password and email for 1.

  • What evidence do you have to back up that statement? None as usual… I hope you aren’t counting all of your personalities in your majority total…

  • My faith in humanity plummets every time I am forced to wonder if I’m talking to a tween.

    I’m not exactly sure what you mean by that, but if you’re saying that bad spelling is a “tween” thing, then you’re not connecting with the right kids.

  • Again, you are absolutely correct! That’s why democracy as we know it will fail: Morons voting for morons or the corrupt.

Comments are currently closed.