Fred Postill Vs. The Sun

FRED POSTILL VS. THE SUN

INTRODUCTION

In recent issues the SUN has been running down an analysis of this year's Wastenaw County sheriff's race. We have come down especially hard on Fred Postill, a nominee in the Aug. 8 Democratic primary. Postill was fired by Sheriff Doug Harvey five years ago and desperately wants to get even with Harvey by becoming the new sheriff. Postill has alredy scared Harvey into jumping to the American Independent Partyby sewing up the support of the local Democratic-liberal establishment. And as it stands right now, Postill has at least as much chance of being elected sheriff as Harvey. So, the SUN has done some investigating - and found that Postill is not quite the progressive candidate he pretends to be, bringing to mind how Harvey orginally got elected in 1964 by posing as a reformist.

In order that the voters not be hoodwinked again, the SUN is printing the following letter from Postill along with our reply. We believe the people will see through Postill's clever statements and recognize his propoganda for what it its. 

We have labelled Postill's letter in different sections to make it easier to understand and analyze.

-SUN Editorial Board -

POSTILL LETTER

To the Sun: The July 7 issue of the Sun ran an article on the sheriff's race which contained so many errors about me that I felt a reply was n order.

ACCURACY AND PROFESSIONALISM

One of the few accurate claims in the article was the statement that I want to professionalize the Sheriff's Department. I would like to clear up that this means:

- I do not intend to train deputies like secret agents.

- I do not intend to buy more riot control gear.

- I do not intend to use or tolerate excessive force or unreasonable searches.

Professionalism means sheriff's deputies who know the law and how to enforce the law, and who know how to respect the dignity and civil rights of citizens in the process. Professionalism means deputies who use force only when it is needed, and then only as much as is needed. When I was a deputy, I never shot a gun at any person. Nor did I ever strike another person with a weapon. Of course, this is partly due to good luck that I never got into situations where I had to use weapons, but I think it shows that I would not go out of my way to use weapons against people. Professionalism means valuing human life above property; this means not using force against demonstrators who are causing only minor property damage, and not using deadly weapons against unarmed people. Professionalism means deputies who will be prosecuted when they break the law.

ENFORCING THE LAW

I do not believe that any law enforcement officer can say that he will not enforce some laws. The sheriff is required by law to enforce all laws to the best of his ability. He must not set himself above the law by not doing this. Since there is no way that the sheriff can arrest every person who violates every law, he has to decide which laws are most important and concentrate on those. He may never arrest anyone for violating the unimportant laws, but he can't say that he won't enforce them. As sheriff, I would assign highest priority to crimes of violence and other crimes that threaten the safety of the public, such as drunk and reckless driving - also theft. Lowest priority would be minor traffic violations and possession of marijuana.

COMMUNITY CONTROL

Anyone who has seen Doug Harvey in action will agree that the sheriff has too much power and needs to be controlled more by the community. I would like to see the county create a Citizen Advisory Board to investigate complaints about the conduct of the Sheriff's Departmant and its members. This board shoutd have on it the sheriff, a representative of the deputies' union, and members of the public. There should be enough citizens on the board so the sheriff doesn't control it. The county cannot make such a board legally binding on the sheriff, but I would agree to carry out any disciplinary measures that the board recommended.

COMMUNITY RELATIONS

Relations with the community depend on conditions within the sheriff's department. Right now it is run like the army, with stress on spit and polish, no tolerance for dissent or long hair or different life-styles inside or outside the department. I would change this by relaxing the military atmosphere, by demanding that the deputies be polite and respectful to all people. Deputies who will not or cannot do this are not what I consider professional, and I will not keep them in the department. Only when the deputies can show this respect for people inside and outside the department who are different from themselves will we be able to attract the sort of qualified people who can relate to the black and youth communities. It is not enough to hire young and black middle class people. Right now the people we need would not want to work for Sheriff Harvey, and he would not hire them. Under Sheriff Harvey, the deputies' union has not gotten beyond the point of providing some job security for its men. I favor a real union which would bargain collectively for wages and working conditions, handle grievances, and not allow its men to cross picket lines while off duty to perform scab labor. (Harvey and some of his men have served as scab security guards at CPHA durinq the strike there by the UAW).

THE JAIL

Undwr Sheriff Harvey's control the county jail has been like a dungeon from the dark ages. Prisoners have not been protected from each other, with the result that there have been several gang rapes and many beating of prisoners by other prisoners. This is, of course, in addition to beatings and other indignities that prisoners, especially those who are black or who have long hair, have suffered at the hands of deputies. As sheriff, I wil I ensure the safety of prisoners from each other and from any abuses by my deputies. There is no way to make the present jail into a good jail: the state, which tolerates a prison as bad as Jackson State, has ordered the county to build a new one because the present one is beyond hope. (Moon opposes building a new jail). I would try to insure that the new jail has adequate medical, recreational, and library (including legal) facilities. I would like to set up rehabilitative services in the jail, particularly in the area of drug problems. Money and people are available to set up a program along the lines of Ozone or Drug Help in the jail.

THE PISTOL WHIPPING INCIDENT

Doug Harvey has victimized and brutalized many people over the years. His brand of corrupt, violent, and intolerant law enforcement has alienated many people and caused them to favor revolutionary politics. I have been fired twice by Harvey, unjustly, and black listed from other police departments by him. He has done this by circulating a charge filed against me by my wife's former husband. The charqe was that I pistol-whipped him. The truth is that he attacked her with a beer bottle, and I subdued him without a pistol. Both my wife, who was married to him at the time, and I were injured more than he was, and he was convicted of assault and battery in Pontiac. This is a matter of public record, but Harvey still circulates the charge. I have tried to take legal action against him for this distortion and for the many acts of corruption and violence that I have learned about, but with no success. In the process, I too, have shifted my politics to the left; but I still believe that the system of law enforcement can be made to work justly by peopte who are committed to it and who are willing to be bound by the laws. This is my commitment. I propose to be bound by the law and to enforce the law with the priorities I listed above.

AN HRP CANDIDACY

If there is a four party race for sheriff this fall, (Harvey vs. Republican vs. Democrat vs. HRP), the most likely outcome is that Harvey or Republican Harold Owings will be elected. A record turnout of about 100,000 is expected in the county; HRP would have to get four times the 7.500 votes it got in April in order to win. HRP cannot get this many votes, but it can get enough to make the Democrats lose, and then re-elect Doug Harvey. The SUN apparently intends to encourage an HRP candidate in spite of this,

THE REVOLUTION

Possibly they have not considered the fact that their action will keep Harvey in office for four more years of corruption and prisoner abuse. Perhaps they have considered that they are really helping Harvey, and they are doing so because they feel that his illegal searches and police riots are good for the revolutionary movement. Afterall, Doug Harvey is probably the best maker of revolutionaries in the county.

EPILOGUE

In either case, I urge you to see for yourself that I am a progressive, who wants to reform the sheriff's department.

-Fred Postill-

QUOTATIONS FROM REPORTS ON THE AWOL SHOOTING INCIDENT

"I gave chase and both myself and the Deputy Couch called for him to stop and then fired several warning shots."

From police report written by Fred Postill 

3 June 1967

"Orval Hanton, foreman at the Metco Processing Corp., 1293 E. Cross, Ypsilanti, stated that while he and two girls were working in the shop, they had heard some noise, sounding something like firecrackers and a window busted in back of them. Mr. Hanton stated he found a small piece of metal lying on the floor."

From the police report written by Deputy J. Swope

"Went to 380 Harris in Ypsilanti and found what appeared to be a hole in the window, apparently made by a .38 pistol. There was also a hole in the headlight rim of the car sitting in front of this location. I found two holes in a storage trailer for B&G Mobile Homes at 1401 E. Michigan and found that the shells had penetrated the trailer and broken (12) storm windows. The manager does want to be reimbursed for the windows ($90). 

From the police report written by Deputy Charles Housley, 3 June 1967

SUN'S REPLY

Dear Fred: Your letter is packaged neatly and tied together with high-sounding rhetoric. But it also says a lot about you and what sort of sheriff you would be.

ACCURACY AND PROFESSIONALISM

Right off, Fred, we have a conflict with your definition of accuracy. You accuse us of being "inaccurate" in our judgement of you. And you ask us to believe that you will not use excessive force against the citizens of our community.

But then you try to run a lie on us. You say you never fired a gun at any person, especially an unarmed person. The truth is, that when you were a deputy under Sheriff Harvey, you fired several "warning" shots at a brother who was AWOL from an iIlegal war. The brother was unarmed and had his back to you. Those shots did not hit him but they almost hit some innocent bystanders in a nearby shop.

We know you fired those shots because we have a copy of a police report that says exactly that. We believe your own report is enough to expose you as a liar. In this same section, you talk about "professionalizing" the sheriff's department but you never explain exactly what that means. "professionalism" seems to imply efficiency. In your campaign literature, you say you want to remedy "the lack of cooperation between agencies," and you also favor expanding the computer networks. To us, that means you would be running an FBI-style department where unsubstantiated information about people's private lives is often transferred from one file to another or from one agency to another and eventually ends up ruining innocent people's lives.

ENFORCING THE LAW

This section is the real guts of the sheriff's job. You make it sound like you know what you're talking about. But we don't think you do - or else you're trying to pull another fast one.

Your holier-than-thou attitude doesn't make it. We've seen you at weed parties and we've seen you littering the ground with your leaflets. These are petty infractions, of course. But we know you, and many other people, break a lot of laws every day, laws that are enforced discriminately, only against people without lawyers or money or influence. The fact is, Fred, that cops everywhere decide every day what laws they are going to enforce and which ones thay aran't. Now if you're not willing to admit that, then we don't know where you been. But you should get off that self-righteous kick, okay?

What is really important here, though. is what you plan to do with your investigative and enforcement powers. You say you're going to pursue violent criminals. assumably murderers and rapists, and perhaps drunk drivers - and thieves (many of whom, as you admit in your brochures, are hardcore junkies). Let's look at that. It doesn't hold water. The sheriff's department doesn't actually deal with too many murderers and rapists, because those cases are usually handled by city police. And alkies and junkies, we believe, do not belong in any jail. So what are your detectives going to do?

On another occasion Fred, you forgot to mention that you fired a shot from your .25 automatic when you got involved in a fight white off duty. You tried to arrest George Jones of Gregory, Michigan on Oct. 12, 1967 in the Schwaben Inn but when you wrote up your report for the sheriff's department you neglected to report you fired your gun in the affair.

An article in The Ann Arbor News of 13 October, 1967, however reported: "Deputy Postill said he fired a warning shot into the air," after Jones fled. The Ann Arbor News article was based on an Ann Arbor Police Report. Incidentally, Fred, the Ann Arbor Police Department has a policy against firing "warning shots."

We think you should be advocating something entirely different, something really progressive. We think detectives should look at corporations that pollute the air and water and into landlords who violate the rent freeze or violate housing codes or allow tenants to be bitten by rats and cockroaches. We think you should investigate price-fixing, consumer fraud, land grabs, short-weighting and anti-trust violations. Wherever laws exist, you should try to obtain convictions. Where laws do not exist, you should hand over your information to private groups and individuals who can sue for damages.

But that's not your plan. We wonder, do you even consider polluters or rip-off businessmen to be crimnals. Perhaps you've never seen a child vomitting after swallowing paint flake in some rundown flat, or watched an elderly person suffocating from the plumes of pollution pouring from a smokestack. Until you can come cross with some strong attacks on these criminals, and until you promise to givem them a "highest" priority, you have no business even pretending to be a true progressive.

Incidentally, we noticed you kept referring to the sheriff as a "he." Did you ever conceive of a woman sheriff? Hmmnn, chew on that awhile. And another thing, Fred, how come you make a point of "possession" of pot? How about "sale"? Did you know, for instance, that Ann Arbor's new $5 pot law also includes "sale"? You seem to be tripping over some of your clever rhetoric here.

COMMUNITY CONTROL

We didn't think you had the gall to pawn off an "advisory" board as any sort of real community control. C'mon, now, who do you think you're kidding? A Citizens Advisory Board doesn't make it, Fred. How about a Citizens CONTROL Board? Can you dig that, or is that TOO progressive for you.

And don't give us this bit about how you're willing to go along with any disciplinary measures the board recommends. You should know that discipline is only a small part of the overall scheme in the sheriff's department. A citizens board must have control over general policies and budget allocations before it has any real power. And you're not interested in that, are you? You want the power to be precisely where it has always been - in the hands of the sheriff.

COMMUNITY RELATIONS

Again you give your real self away. What is this about hiring "black middle class people?" What about poor black people? Or you don't believe that poor blacks could be "professional" enough for your department.

Also, you beg the question when you talk only about deputies who perform scab labor. You don't explain how the sheriff's department effectively breaks strikes by providing protection for other scabs to cross picket lines. That's been a practice with Harvey, and, as far as we know, would be a practice with you.

THE JAIL

This is a well-written section. But it still is not persuasive. Nowhere do you mention inmate selfgovernment. Rather you talk about protecting prisoners from each other, as if they are all weird animals. What you seem to be advocating is a separate cell for every prisoner, instead of setting up ways for prisoner brotherhood and sisterhood. The real issue here is human beings, not facilities. 

THE PISTOLWHIPPING INCIDENT

Your actions in the incident were not entirely circumspect. According to your wife's former husband, you did pull a pistol and threaten to kill him - felonious assault - a crime that is punishable by five years in prison. His complaint against you was contained in a police report filed with the Pontiac Police Department. He was later convicted of assault, it is true, according to court reports. But there apparently were two sides to the argument - and neither side was entirely without blame.

AN HRP CANDIDACY

Your arrogance in dismissing the potential success of an HRP candidate seems to be a fitting way for you to end your letter. You sound a lot like those skeptics who scoffed at George McGovern's campaign for the presidential nomination and who laughed at HRP's chances in the spring elections. The voters make the final decision in elections, Fred, not you.

THE REVOLUTION

No revolution needs to depend on the eccentricities of any one reactionary. There are always others, perhaps you, waiting to jump out of the woodwork.

EPILOGUE

Power to the People.

- Sun Editorial Board -