limerick township, pa (montgomery county) police department
Dirty Sanchez
Hopefully, the following exchanges of correspondence between Paul
Kennedy and various subscribers to the LIM-SF list will serve as
a quick catch-up. There were other postings on the matter which
I have not included. If you are concerned about Homeland Security
and the Nuke facility you might want to read Don Kelly's posting which
I will post at the end of this message.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kennedy" <PMK...@COMCAST.NET>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 8:35 PM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy - Limerick Police
> Yes.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pig Will"
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 7:25 PM
> Subject: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy - Limerick Police
>
>
> > Paul, Is the mentally challenged guy named Mike Smith?
> >
> >
> > PWill
> >
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kennedy" <PMK...@COMCAST.NET>
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
> Jeff,
>
> There are a lot of things I could confirm or dispute.
> The fact is I left the Limerick Township Police Department because I was
no
> longer going to be associated with what I believe to be
> an immoral, unethical and dishonest group of people that had control over
> that department.
>
> As time passes, and I hear what has, and more importantly, what has not,
> transpired, I grow more disgusted with the department and the township.
>
> Was there damage to a motorcycle?...yes.
> Do I know who had the accident with the motorcycle?... Yes.
> Has he ever caused damage to a vehicle?... Yes
> Has he ever been caught in a compromising situation, causing embarassment
to
> the township?... Yes
> Has he ever been absent without leave?...Yes
> And are you still paying his salary?...Yes
>
> Do I know who donated the money for the motorcycles?...I don't know the
> name, but it is an organization that is not associated with
> Limerick township, nor even in Montgomery County. Why did they donate the
> money to Limerick?...I don't know.
> And yet, the officer responsible for bringing this organization to the
> attention of Limerick had been absent and/or sick more than any other
> probationary officer I had seen, missed manditory firearms qualification,
> and is rumored to have paid another officer $2000 to switch his
> midnight shift, with the other officer who was on days, and still made it
> through probation. And I have seen this officer sitting for long periods
of
> time, in the parking lot of the Limerick Generating Station, backed deep
> into a shady corner, presumably on patrol? And you are still paying his
> salary.
>
> What else would you like to know?
>
> Would you like me to tell you about a detail authorized by Chief Weaver,
to
> have Limerick Police provide security at a private function occurring not
in
> Limerick,
> but rather in Philadelphia? And would you like to hear how Chief Weaver
> considered this to be a commmunity policing event?
>
> Would you like me to tell you about an officer who asked me repeatedly,
over
> several years, if another officer had been killed, or if he had died
today?
> and profess his hatred for this officer? And would you like to hear about
a
> verbal assault unleashed by this very officer, against the other whom he
> hated,
> in the presence of a supervising officer, and yet the supervisor permitted
> this verbal assault to continue for many minutes? Would you also like to
> hear if this
> same officer is involved in the recent departure of some township
employees?
> And you are still paying his salary.
>
> Would you like me to tell you about a mentally challenged young man who
> believes he worked for the police department, was given some
> old equipment by the Chief, and would respond to police calls saying he
was
> working for Doug Weaver and the Limerick Police?
> And would you further like to hear how this young man had been encouraged
in
> this behavior by Chief Weaver?
> And would you like to hear how this young man tried to file a complaint
> against me, at the encouragement of Chief Weaver, after I told the young
man
> he was not a police officer, nor was he associated with the department in
> any way, and his actions put him at personal risk.
>
> Would you like to hear how a first floor urinal overflowed above my desk
> located in the lower level, and I was advised by the former township
manager
> that it was not his problem, and that my desk remained covered in water
and
> broken ceiling tiles for several days?
>
> Would you like to here how some officers and I complained to the Chief of
> the offensive sewer odor which existed in the lower level of the police
> department
> for many years, and how our complaint was met with a harsh reaction from
the
> Chief, as if we were unloyal to him? And how we endured a constant
> infestation of ants and flies,And of course, how it finally forced the
> repair to a cracked sewer pipe, which had been spewing raw sewage into a
> wall in the police locker room?
>
> Would you like to hear about how I was removed from the traffic unit, and
> got a memo from the Sergeant telling me that it was done so per my
request,
> and when I questioned the Chief as to why this was done, and not at my
> request, the Chief told me that he himself told the Sergeant to put that
in
> the memo.
> The Chief thought it would look better for me that way, and apparently
did
> not balk at putting things in writing that were not accurate.
>
> Would you be interested in hearing about an incident where I stopped a
> vehicle occupied by actors involved in a shooting in Pottstown, and I
found
> myself being backed up by Chief Weaver dressed in a polo shirt and jeans,
> and having no gun on him?
>
> Would you like to hear about the lack of proficiency displayed by some
> officers, with regards to their ability to shoot and handle their
firearms?
> And the even greater lacking by the department administration, to provide
> an opportunity for these officers to train.
>
> Would you like to hear about 3 officers' response to a burglar alarm
> occurring at a local business during the night, and all the officers
missed
> the
> 3' x 3' hole cut into the wall of the business, and no supervising officer
> questioned the officers that missed the hole? And, of course, you are
still
> paying their salary.
>
> Would you be interested in hearing about an officer who has a great number
> of DUI arrests, yet many of his criminal complaints suggested
> improper police tactics, and could even be construed as violating
> constitutional case law, and yet this officer is held in high regard by
> Chief
> Weaver. And you are still paying his salary.
>
>
> If you would like to hear about these things, and more, then I would have
to
> say that you are about the only one!
>
> I went to Chief Weaver with my concerns of these issues in 2002, and
nothing
> changed.
>
> I went to Township manager Walt Zaremba in 2002, and nothing changed.
>
> I met with the township manager and the township solicitor, Tom Halfpenny,
> several times in mid 2003, and nothing changed.
>
> Nothing changed?...maybe I should rephrase that...
>
> Doug Weaver did get an agreement that will pay his salary and benefits,
> longevity pay, afford him 6 weeks of paid vacation, 10
> paid Holidays, sick leave or reimbursement of same, 5 paid personal days,
> all while drawing a salary from the Berks County
> District Attorney's office.
>
>
> Why don't the residents of Limerick ask these questions of their Board of
> Supervisors? They have the answers to all the questions you ask here.
>
> As for me, I can at least take comfort in the fact that I do not reside in
> Limerick Township, as it was challenging enough just to work there.
>
>
> Paul Kennedy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeffrey Hallowell"
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 2:21 PM
> Subject: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
>
>
> > Paul,
> >
> > Can you help me with some information I heard over the
> > weekend? Maybe it is just bs but the source was credible. I
> > was told that a lot of the motorcycle donation business of
> > $30,000.00 was so much bull and that the people should
> > demand that the Montco DA investigate the entire matter.
> >
> > Paul, do you know who destroyed the one motorcycle? Has it
> > been replaced?
> >
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > ==
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kennedy" <PMK...@COMCAST.NET>
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 1:23 PM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
> Jeff,
>
> I would not argue your assessment of the police department, but I will
offer
> a few additional insights.
>
> As to a "split" in the department, I would say it not based on support of
> W.Douglas Weaver or William Schlichter, but rather
> those officers who want things to be as they always have been, and those
> that would embrace change,
> as the township has changed drastically over the past 10 years.
>
> I agree that the department could make tremendous improvements in
community
> relations.
> Some officers try that on their own, without the support of the complete
> department.
> Some examples...
> One officer put together a bicycle rodeo and a bowling tournament, to
offer
> children and their families
> a chance to interact with police officers, and learn some safety tips.
This
> same officer is deeply involved in the Pennsylvania State Police Camp
Cadet
> program, which is held annually at Camp Kweebec in the northern end of
> Limerick township. There is generally little involvement coming from the
> administrative offices of the department, other than permitting the
officer
> to participate. These types of community events are generally welcomed by
> residents, but understand
> that they must be supported by the police administration, and therefore be
> included within the operating budget. It is not fair to anyone to have an
> officer
> scheduled to handle calls for service, and try to be working a community
> event. It just doesn't work.
>
>
> As to your point on the visibility of the police, I have strong feelings.
> I agree with you, and it was my goal to aggressively patrol the township
> neighborhoods during my shift.
> One day, during a heated discussion I had with Chief Weaver regarding a
> traffic detail he wanted to have occur, I had made
> the comment that it was not my SWORN DUTY to generate revenue for the
> township, but rather make the township secure by my presence.
> The Chief advised that it was HIS job to generate revenue for the
township,
> and that there was more to the (police) job than just
> driving around waving at people. To me, the duty and purpose of traffic
> enforcement is to make the roadways safer, not create supplemental
> revenue for a municipality. To that end, Jeff Bealer and I created an
> effective Traffic Safety Unit that addressed the concerns of the
residents,
> enforced traffic laws on township roadways, as well as targeted
enforcement
> along Rt. 422, made significant changes to highway traffic control
> signage throughout the township, and provided the department with well
> trained accident investigators. Jeff Bealer and I worked many
> fatal accident investigations together, and the loss of that experience
will
> be felt within the department.
>
>
> To this same end, understand that one of my grievances within the
department
> was that an officer's yearly evaluation consisted of the following
criteria:
> 1) Apprehends Traffic Violators
> 2) Criminal Invesigation Functions
> 3) Court Preparation
> 4) Patrol Action & Activity
> 5) Report Writing
> 6) Job Skill Performance
> 7) Special Assignments
>
> Of these criteria, only traffic and summary/ criminal arrests can be
> quantified, and therefore are used as the benchmark against which all
> officers are evaluated
> (below /meets /above standards). An officer's ability to have impact upon
> the community is a qualitative component, and not fully incorporated into
> the evaluation process. Did an officer respond to a priority call in a
> timely fashion? Did the officer bring resolution to the incident which met
> the criteria of staying within the boundaries of the law, as well as
> exercising good judgement, courage, due discretion and compassion?
> These things are, in my opinion, the responsiblity of supervising officers
> to observe, note and evaluate. Yet, my evaluations were conducted by a
> Corporal who
> worked with me only 4 hours, out of my 12 hour shift, and who was out on
> training two days a month. His observations of my performance were
resticted
> to small percentage of my time on duty, and therefore should be questioned
> on it's accuracy. Of course, if you compare the number of tickets I wrote
> against another officer, I would be considered "below standards". I often
> advised people of the nature of their violation, the possible consequences
> that could come from their
> violation, and give them a warning, rather than a citation. I believe that
> would have more positive impact on one's future driving behavior.
>
> These are some of the issues that caused a "split" within the police
> department. These are philosophical, moral and ethical issues, which
should
> be shaped by the Chief of Police. As such, I feel that those of us looking
> for the kind of change indicated within my correspondences, felt that we
> were not a good "fit" in the Limerick Township Police Department, under
the
> leadership of Chief Weaver. As such, some officers left so as to make one
> final stand for our beliefs.
>
> Paul Kennedy
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeffrey Hallowell"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 11:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
>
>
> > Paul,
> >
> > I'm probably going to bore you, but let me give you
> > my personal perception of Limerick's police department
> > which is based on conversations with various officers
> > from Limerick and others departments, township officials,
> > citizens, newspaper articles and so forth, over the last
> > twelve years. I'm sure others residents developed similar
> > perceptions as well. Just the personal opinion of one
> > resident.
> >
> > a. I had heard a few times of strife within the department.
> > What I heard was that the department was split. 50% for
> > Weaver and 50% for Sgt. Bill Schlicter.
> >
> > b. The department has a poor relationship with the
> > residents. It doesn't take much to build the support of'
> > the community.
> >
> > c. Too much negativity came forward; i.e. the officer
> > photographed sleeping in his police vehicle, the stripper
> > party at the shopping center, and more recently the
> > Valentine's Day issue. I know a lot of stuff comes with
> > the territory, but these were over the line and ended up
> > known to many.
> >
> > The department is wrong keeping certain things a
> > secret when it knows that the public is already aware
> > of it, i.e. the motorcycles (how they were really obtained
> > and what happened to one of them), why certain officers
> > would suddenly retire, i.e. the one that now heads a
> > local security company (forget his name) and another
> > one named Jeff.
> >
> > d. Lack of visibility. Drive through any other township
> > and you see their police. In Limerick I hardly ever see
> > the police unless they are on 422 giving out speeding
> > tickets.
> >
> > The present deal with Weaver as portrayed by the
> > supervisors
> > is a screwing of the taxpayers. The question is why? The
> > public needs to know.
> >
> > Paul, like I stated this is just one man's perception and
> > opinion.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paul Kennedy" <PMK...@COMCAST.NET>
> >
> > Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
> >
> >
> > > Jeff,
> > >
> > > I have to commend The Mercury for trying to provide the
> > public with this
> > > information.
> > > I can appreciate the fine line that must be walked, when
> > dealing with issues
> > > like these, and it appears to me that the newpaper
> > > is taking a reasonable approach to the matters at issue.
> > Understand that
> > > many parties involved may not be willing to speak to
> > > a newspaper at this time, and I, for one, never thought
> > these issues would
> > > make headlines.
> > >
> > > I also must exercise caution and discretion as to what I
> > say, as people are
> > > often looking to bring litigation against others.
> > > Witness my previous comment about Jeff Bealer receiving a
> > letter from Chief
> > > Weaver's attorneys, threatening a slander suit.
> > > Of course, slander could only charged if things were
> > proven to be false, and
> > > detrimental to one's reputation.
> > > To my knowledge, there appears to be no immediate steps
> > being taken to prove
> > > or disprove Bealer's comments regarding the work
> > environment
> > > within the township police department, so I find the
> > attorney's letter to be
> > > without merit.
> > >
> > > As to your specific question regarding an officer of the
> > police department,
> > > I must say that I believe it would be improper
> > > for me to comment on these issues. My belief is that the
> > taxpayers should
> > > address any questions or concerns regarding their
> > > police department, directly to those in charge, whoever
> > that may be at this
> > > time. My previous comments about Officers Brian Skelton
> > > and David Bartok not responding to a domestic situation,
> > and having a
> > > outside agency cover the call, were based on information
> > that would
> > > be available to anyone monitoring the police dispatches
> > via a police scanner
> > > radio, and not based on being an employee of the
> > township.
> > > That said however, I do say that as a police offiicer in
> > Limerick, I
> > > witnessed similar types of actions by officers, which
> > contributed to my
> > > resignation.
> > >
> > > Please understand that any behavior or activity that I
> > believed to be
> > > detrimental to the police department and the township,
> > was brought to the
> > > attention of the Chief of Police, and the township
> > manager. They are charged
> > > with the responsibility to render judgement on the
> > behaviors of their
> > > employees. If they determine certain behaviors and
> > actions to be
> > > acceptable, but that I find unethical or irresponsible,
> > then what else can I
> > > do?
> > > Resign?
> > >
> > > I am not so sensitive as to be offended by every little
> > indiscretion or
> > > lapse in judgement that an officer may make.
> > > We are all quite capable of making mistakes from time to
> > time, and I believe
> > > that accepting our mistakes openly, allows us to learn
> > from them.
> > > I have made many mistakes in my life, and I am sure I
> > will make more, but
> > > they are honest mistakes and made without intent or
> > malice.
> > > But since I wore the same uniform as all the other
> > officers, and I know that
> > > police are often judged by the public, not as
> > individuals, but rather as a
> > > group, it was important to me that we all meet a certain
> > level of integrity.
> > > My reputation was tied directly to that of any other
> > officer, and to the
> > > reputation
> > > of the Chief. Unfortunately for me, that is an
> > association with which I was
> > > not comfortable.
> > >
> > > Paul Kennedy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jeffrey Hallowell"
> >
> > > Subject: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
> > >
> > >
> > > > I am happy that Paul Kennedy has spoken out. As usual
> > the
> > > > Mercury article didn't say much. The people of Limerick
> > > > deserve to know the details.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe Paul can tell us if the following rumor is
> > > > true....was
> > > > an officer named Adam Moore in the middle of this
> > matter
> > > > due to certain activities?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeff
> > > >
> > > > ==
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kennedy" <PMK...@COMCAST.NET>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 10:30 PM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
> Jeff,
>
> I have to commend The Mercury for trying to provide the public with this
> information.
> I can appreciate the fine line that must be walked, when dealing with
issues
> like these, and it appears to me that the newpaper
> is taking a reasonable approach to the matters at issue. Understand that
> many parties involved may not be willing to speak to
> a newspaper at this time, and I, for one, never thought these issues would
> make headlines.
>
> I also must exercise caution and discretion as to what I say, as people
are
> often looking to bring litigation against others.
> Witness my previous comment about Jeff Bealer receiving a letter from
Chief
> Weaver's attorneys, threatening a slander suit.
> Of course, slander could only charged if things were proven to be false,
and
> detrimental to one's reputation.
> To my knowledge, there appears to be no immediate steps being taken to
prove
> or disprove Bealer's comments regarding the work environment
> within the township police department, so I find the attorney's letter to
be
> without merit.
>
> As to your specific question regarding an officer of the police
department,
> I must say that I believe it would be improper
> for me to comment on these issues. My belief is that the taxpayers should
> address any questions or concerns regarding their
> police department, directly to those in charge, whoever that may be at
this
> time. My previous comments about Officers Brian Skelton
> and David Bartok not responding to a domestic situation, and having a
> outside agency cover the call, were based on information that would
> be available to anyone monitoring the police dispatches via a police
scanner
> radio, and not based on being an employee of the township.
> That said however, I do say that as a police offiicer in Limerick, I
> witnessed similar types of actions by officers, which contributed to my
> resignation.
>
> Please understand that any behavior or activity that I believed to be
> detrimental to the police department and the township, was brought to the
> attention of the Chief of Police, and the township manager. They are
charged
> with the responsibility to render judgement on the behaviors of their
> employees. If they determine certain behaviors and actions to be
> acceptable, but that I find unethical or irresponsible, then what else can
I
> do?
> Resign?
>
> I am not so sensitive as to be offended by every little indiscretion or
> lapse in judgement that an officer may make.
> We are all quite capable of making mistakes from time to time, and I
believe
> that accepting our mistakes openly, allows us to learn from them.
> I have made many mistakes in my life, and I am sure I will make more, but
> they are honest mistakes and made without intent or malice.
> But since I wore the same uniform as all the other officers, and I know
that
> police are often judged by the public, not as individuals, but rather as a
> group, it was important to me that we all meet a certain level of
integrity.
> My reputation was tied directly to that of any other officer, and to the
> reputation
> of the Chief. Unfortunately for me, that is an association with which I
was
> not comfortable.
>
> Paul Kennedy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 6:01 PM
> Subject: [LIM-SF] Paul Kennedy
>
>
> > I am happy that Paul Kennedy has spoken out. As usual the
> > Mercury article didn't say much. The people of Limerick
> > deserve to know the details.
> >
> > Maybe Paul can tell us if the following rumor is
> > true....was
> > an officer named Adam Moore in the middle of this matter
> > due to certain activities?
> >
> >
> > Jeff
> >
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Kennedy
To: LIM...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Limerick Police Department
Vicky,
I did not go to the Fraternal Order of Police with my issues regarding the
unwarranted change of my shift.
I asked some members of the police department if they felt the changing of
my shift was wrong, and if so, would we as a
group go to the FOP. I did not get a positive response from many officers.
This is an extremely difficult situation to fully comprehend, as most people
are under the impression that police officers
stand together as a group. While this is often true in many departments, it
is not the case in Limerick.
The FOP is not a labor union for most police officers in Pennsylvania (it is
the labor union for Phila. PD officers) . There is no obligation for an
officer to join the FOP, and in fact, not all officers in Limerick are FOP
members. It is merely a fraternal organization that may or may not choose to
offer legal and/or financial assistance to an officer in need.It is not
obligated to provide assisance, even though one pays the annual dues,
currently about $140.00/year. Any assistance offered must be agreed upon by
the body.
Over the past couple of years, I know Jeff Bealer had contacted Montgomery
County FOP Lodge 14, and asked for assistance and advice
regarding matters of concern. The response from the FOP lodge was to
"document" matters for future consideration. This response by the Lodge
was fairly typical. Understand that the Chief of Police is also a member of
the FOP, and if you have a complaint against the Chief, you are basically
pitting
one lodge member against another.
Having sought the possibilty of organizing with a real labor union, Bealer
and I were not well thought of by the elected board of officers within the
Lodge.
I had the opportunity to speak with Lodge President Tom Momme, in front of
the whole police department, and explain my position. It was clear Pres.
Momme
did not care for my union activities, even though the FOP is not a labor
union for those in Montgomery County. As such, I chose not to go before the
FOP alone to ask for legal assitance, as my department was not interested in
pursuing the matter as a group.
Understand that we did not seek union representation so as to get better
wages, or more time off, or less work load, etc.
We were looking for some means by which to get a voice that would force
certain conditions to change.
Having sought legal counsel with a well established Philadelphia labor law
firm, and discussing the issues of concern,
I was advised that we should consider union representation, as civil law did
not offer protection to those not considered "protected class citizens".
Protected Classes are based on gender, race, religion, sexual orientation,
etc. The law did not offer protections to me, or other officers, within the
scope
of these matters, as we did not fall within the "protected class".
Of particular note regarding the attempt to offer union representation to
the officers of the police department is the following.
Having discussed the lawyers' suggestion of a union with Jeff Bealer, we
researched various unions.
We contacted a local union and made inquiries as to the process, as well as
the unique responsibilities of police officers (i.e not able to strike,
having
to cross picket lines, having to remove picketing workers from certain
locations, etc).
We then set up meetings to allow officers to attend, so as to get
information and decide for themselves if this was of interest to them.
At our first meeting, we were receiving harassing phone calls by
unidentified persons. I had heard, but did not confirm, that one of the
officers
went to the FOP to complain about our activities. In a meeting with Chief
Weaver, I told him that Bealer and I were solely responsible for initiating
the union activity. Chief Weaver expressed to me his dislike of labor
unions, citing his belief that they exist to protect lazy workers. He
further stated that
he was surprised when he found the officers who had expressed interest in
unionizing, to be the officers he considered to be his best officers.
Understand, his best officers may not be the officers with whom he agrees,
but his own admission to me was that those officers that had made, at least,
a commitment to listen to the union representatives, were considered by him
to be some of the officers for which he had high regard.
This did not sound to me like a bunch of lazy cops looking to do less and
get paid more by unionizing.
In the article that appeared in The Mecury, regarding the resignation of
three officers in a short period of time, Chief Weaver insisted that
all officers were treated the same. That may well be his assertion, but when
close to half of the department signs cards with intent to organize under a
union,
I would question whether the Chief's assertion is accurate. Has there been
any investigation into Bealer's comments made in his letter of resignation?
I know I have not been contacted by anyone at the township, although I read
Tom DiBello's comments that say the township would look into the matter.
Further, Tom DiBello commented that reading Chief Weaver's decision not to
seek a renewal of his contract, was "the hardest letter I ever had to read".
I guess Sgt Schlichter's resignation, my resignation, nor Jeff Bealer's
resignation, was particularly difficult to accept. Joe Greco commented on
Chief Weaver's
decision that "no one has given so much to this township as you have". I
would remind Mr. Greco that William Schlichter nearly lost his life on Rt.
422 several
years ago, when a tractor trailer slammed into his patrol car, at speed.
While I commend these gentleman for publicly supporting their Chief of
Police,
I hope we have not lost site of the fact that there are many officers who
are on patrol, willing to make sacrifices for, and contributions to, the
township every
day they arrive for work.
My responses to your questions, are meant to enlighten you and the people of
Limerick Township. As an employee of the township, I felt I was not at
liberty to bring certain things to light via means suggested here (DA's
office, Atty General's office, the news media). I tried, as did other
officers, to follow the proper channels available to use, and bring about
change. Those channels failed to bring about change. As such, the police
department lost three officers with a combined experience of 30 years on the
job. I think that is a tremendous loss to the township.
I am not a resident of Limerick Township, nor a resident of the SpringFord
School District, so my contributions to this listserv are limited solely to
my experiences
concerning my reasons for resigning. I do, however, appreciate the comments
expressed by those here, and I know there are officers still on the force
that would appreciate it as well. I believe that the Limerick Police
Department has some exceptionally dedicated officers. I was proud to work
with them, and hope that more don't leave.
Paul Kennedy
----- Original Message -----
From: Vicky Mayer
To: LIM...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Limerick Police Department
Paul,
Did you go to the FOP with your issues?
Vicky
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Kennedy
To: LIM...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Limerick Police Department
Ms. Ricci,
I did stand up for myself, and many other officers in the Limerick Police
Department, as did Jeff Bealer.
It has been a very difficult 2 years, battling what we believed to be
improper and unethical activity within the department.
As employees, we were limited in our ability to affect change, while
maintaining our obligations to our employer, and maintaining
our role as subordinates. Please believe me when I say, we exhausted all
possibilities, at great risk to our careers, as witnessed by our departure
from the department.
I believe the information contained in John Gentzel's article did not come
as a surprise to many within the township police department or
administration building, as I was personally communicating with township
administrators for approximately 18 months, regarding my concerns.
As the chain of command required me to meet with the Chief of Police, so as
to request permission to file a grievance against the Chief of Police, I did
just that.
As such, I met with Chief Weaver back in the summer of 2002 for over 2
hours, and expressed my concerns and observations. He and I did not see
things the same way.
I was permitted to go to the next level, and met with the township manager.
Again, another 2 hour meeting. As of the time of my resignation in the fall
of 2003,
I had seen no change in the issues that concerned me. While there were
discrete inquires being made, no substantive action had taken place.
My scheduled shift, which had been based on my seniority within the
department, had been suddenly changed, as we approached September 2003.
My shift had been a permanant day shift which I held for over 2 years, and I
was suddenly placed on permanant midnights, on the opposite platoon, with no
reason offered, and an officer with one year on the job had been placed in
my position. I was the senior officer on my squad, consisting of me, Morris
and Bealer, however my schedule was changed. Very few officers felt this was
wrong, and would not stand with me.
I consulted an attorney again, to inquire as to filing an unfair labor
practice against the township. I was advised I could do this, however it
would cost
approx. $1000.00 in legals fees. I then asked some members of the department
if they would stand with me. I got very little interest, and did not feel
like I should
invest my money into a legal process which seemed of little interest to the
majority of the department.
After a while, Bealer and I realized that we held different beliefs and
standards from the majority of officers, and that we offered this department
many opportunities to seek remedies, in which the majority of officers were
not interested. As such, we felt we had to leave, as we could not get the
solid support of the officers or the township administrators.
I would agree with your assessment that Chief Weaver is allowed a free hand
in running the department, and that he does have a strong sense of self
preservation.
Jeff Bealer advised me that he received a letter from a law firm
representing Chief W. Douglas Weaver, within days of the John Gentzel
article appearing in the November 16, 2003 edition of The Mercury. The
letter advised Bealer to cease his allegations of harassment and hostile
work environment within the Limerick Police Deparment,
or face a civil suit of Slander. I guess W. Douglas Weaver can use the civil
courts to protect his reputation, but as lowly officers, we were unable to
use the civil courts to protect our careers.
I had fought for what I believed in, but the fight was long and too costly
for me and Bealer, and we could not get enough support from those who could
really make a difference. I believe it is up to the residents of limerick
Township to decide what kind of Police Department they want. My belief was
that I was there to serve the residents, not the Chief of Police. Bealer and
I upheld the law, using good judgement, considered discretion and
compassion. It would be my assertion that those skills are not paricularly
welcomed in the Limerick Township Police Department.
Paul Kennedy
----- Original Message -----
From: Ricc...@AOL.COM
To:
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 5:23 PM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] Limerick Police Department
Officer Kennedy, you need to file for a federal investigation, you had no
recourse at Limerick Township, simply because the chief always was allowed
to do things his way to protect himself. There was no reason for you to
have quit. You should have just stood up for yourself and let the public
know what was going on.
Pam Ricci
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Kennedy" <PMK...@COMCAST.NET>
To: <LIM...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: [LIM-SF] PAUL KENNEDY
> No, sir, I am not related to Terry Kennedy (Lower Providence P.D.) or Tim
> Kennedy, (Collegeville P.D.)
> Those two are brothers (in the truest sense, not as in the "Brotherhood"
of
> police officers).
> When asked that question, I always told people that I was "the good
looking
> Kennedy" : )
>
> best holiday wishes to all,
>
> Paul Kennedy
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeffrey Hallowell"
> To: <LIM...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
> Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 9:46 AM
> Subject: [LIM-SF] PAUL KENNEDY
>
>
> > OFFICER KENNEDY,
> >
> > Are you related to Terry or the Collegeville officer?
> >
> >
> >
> > Jeff
> >
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Kennedy
To: LIM...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 10:02 AM
Subject: [LIM-SF] Limerick Police Department
to: John Gentzel c/o The Mercury
from: Paul Kennedy
re: Limerick Police Department
John,
My name is Paul Kennedy and I recently met with you regarding my
resignation from the Limerick Township Police Department.
To refresh your memory, our meeting focused on the recent resignations
from the police department of myself, G.Jeffrey Bealer and William S.
Schlichter. I spoke of great concerns that we three former officers
shared, regarding the lack of ethical and moral commitment within the
Department, and how certain behaviors and attitudes were not only
permitted to continue, but were even encouraged by supervisory
personnel, both within the police department and the administrative
offices of the Township.
I have since read your article which appeared in the November 16, 2003
edition of The Mercury, and found it to be a well balanced story. I
felt the story offered both sides the opportunity to comment on the
statements issued in Jeff Bealer's resignation letter, citing a hostile
and harassing work environment. Further, Bealer's letter stated the
hostile work environment was created by the Chief of Police, W. Douglas
Weaver. In our meeting, I confirmed my reasons for leaving the
department were the same as Jeff Bealer's stated reasons. I also told
you that I had not cited my reasons in my resignation letter, as I had
fought for over two years to rectify the situation, to no avail, and
that my reasons were well known to my immediate supervisors. I had
investigated possible litigation against the Chief of Police, only to
find I was not considered a "protected class" by the courts,
restricting me from filing a Harassment suit. The police contract
provided no remedies or relief, which made me and Bealer pursue the
possibility of unionizing the department so as to gain some remedies
and protections, to no avail. I attempted to file a grievance against
the Chief of Police, to which I was advised by the township manager
that no grievance procedure existed, and no action occurred. These
events occurred over a 2-year span, and no relief was offered by the
township, and the Chief of Police became even more bitter towards me
and those officers who supported the initiative.
During this span of time, I had been injured in the line of duty, while
attempting to apprehend a man and his wife, who were wanted by several
law enforcement agencies for passing bad checks, theft, assault, etc.
During a foot pursuit and subsequent 19-mile vehicle pursuit, I broke
my right foot. Chief Weaver never expressed concern of my injury to me,
and had me report to work on the broken foot for two weeks, as doctors
at Occupational Health were not willing to make a definitive diagnosis,
and I was awaiting an appointment with an orthopedic specialist. While
the Chief said it was his duty to protect the township against
unnecessary insurance claims, I believe my attempts to file a grievance
and bring accountability to the department could have influenced his
decision to have me report to work, or take sick time for an on-duty
injury. As well, I received no mention for being injured in the line of
duty, nor any thanks by the Chief or the Department. Township
Supervisors' Greco and Sperring did contact me to express their concern
and appreciation, for which I was grateful. I was always willing to put
myself in harm's way to execute my duties, as are several other
officers. Some notice of that fact is always appreciated.
Although I resigned from the Limerick Township Police Department, I
still maintain a strong friendship with some members of the department
for whom I have undying respect and regard. I also maintain
relationships I forged with residents of Limerick Township, who I had
come to know in my years of service to the Township. These
relationships are extremely important to me, as they are the result of
earned respect. As a police officer, I always stated that we (the
officers) must be accountable and responsible to the residents, and
that we must earn their respect by our actions. As human beings, we
certainly can fall short of those goals, but as police officers, we
must work hard to try to achieve them. The relationships I had formed
in my years on the force, are my measure of how well I was living up to
those goals.
As such, I am still in regular contact with some officers of Limerick
P.D., as well as surrounding police departments. I still have knowledge
of incidents that occur in the region, both through the news media,
police dispatch radio monitoring and conversations with friends and
former colleagues. I am still emotionally involved in these events as
they involve officers with whom I entrusted my life, and in turn, who
placed their faith in me to back them up. These are strong, emotional
ties which do not break easily.
This brings me to the real purpose of this letter. I have witnessed a
set of events which occurred on this day, December 24, 2003, to which I
must speak out against. Having left my current place of employment on
Christmas Eve afternoon, I stopped at a nearby police department to see
a longtime friend who was on duty this day. While speaking with him, I
could hear the various police dispatches for the "West Zone", which
includes my former department, Limerick Township P.D.
I noted three calls for service, dispatched to Limerick Police,
occurring in a relatively short period of time. I also recognized the
officers on duty as Officer Brian Skelton, a 13-year veteran, and
Officer David Bartok, with at least 3-4 years on the job. As the calls
were dispatched, what I heard and subsequently saw, so offended me as a
former police officer, as a citizen, and as human being, I must bring
it to the attention of as many people as I can, in the hope that the
Limerick Police Department will once and for all, rid itself of the
horrendous procedures, which led to the resignations of some of it's
most dedicated police officers, and has quieted the voices of those
officers still there, who may feel the battle has been lost.
On this date, in the late afternoon, (approx. 4 P.M.) I heard Limerick
Police dispatched to a hazardous materials spill at the Circle K gas
station on N. Lewis Rd. Officer Skelton responded to the call. I do not
know the particulars of the call, but as a police officer, I had
responded to similar calls at that location regarding fuel spills.
These calls were typically regarded as fire department dispatches, and
not regarded as priority police calls, although police response was
common so as to offer assistance.
Within a short period of time, Limerick Police were dispatched to a
vehicle accident at Township Line Rd. and W. Ridge Pk.,reporting no
injuries and the vehicles had pulled into the lot of the Wawa. Officer
David Bartok responded to the call. While enroute, Upper Providence
Officer Ray Bechtel advised he was on location at the accident, and
that it had in fact occurred on the Limerick side of the intersection.
Within moments of these events, Montgomery County Radio Dispatch was
advising Officer Brian Skelton that they now had a domestic occurring
at a residence in the northern end of the township. The dispatcher
advised it was between husband and wife, and there were weapons in the
residence. Officer Skelton advised he could not respond, as he was "the
only one" left at the Circle K hazmat, blocking traffic and awaiting a
response from Lewis Environmental. Officer Bartok did not acknowledge
the priority call, but chose to continue to the non-injury accident
which was not blocking traffic, and which had an Upper Providence
police officer on location. Officer Brian Skelton then requested the
county ask a New Hanover police officer respond to the domestic, as all
Limerick officers were tied up.
At this point, I was appalled that Officer Skelton would choose to
remain at a non-priority call, rather than respond to the domestic in
progress. Further, I found Officer Bartok's decision to continue on to
a non priority accident, at which another police officer was on
location, rather than divert to the priority domestic call, an absolute
disgrace. To further add insult to the situation, Limerick had two
officers on duty, neither of which was involved in a priority
situation, and Skelton was requesting the lone New Hanover officer to
handle this domestic by himself.
As I left my visit with my friend, I drove past the Circle K gas
station on N. Lewis Rd, to see why Skelton chose not to respond to the
reported domestic. I found the Circle K open for business, with
vehicles at the gas pumps, and noted some yellow caution tape cordoning
off a small area. I also noted Skelton in his patrol car near the car
wash on the premises, with his 4-way flashers illuminated. No "traffic"
was around him, no fire department personnel were on location, and no
one seemed particularly concerned about the hazardous material spill.
While I found the actions by both Limerick officers to be grossly
negligent and cowardly, I also found it to be exactly the type of
action that I, and other officers, have fought against for many years.
Both Skelton and Bartok are costing Limerick Township residents over
$100,000 per year for their combined salaries, and both are too afraid
to respond to the very type of call for which they get that respectable
salary. I cannot stand by and watch these officers intentionally be
derelict in their duties, when officers such as myself and Bealer were
forced to leave after years of fighting internally to rectify
situations such as this. We would have responded to the domestic call
with great urgency, as would many other officers throughout the region.
Not Skelton and Bartok, however. They chose to remain on their non
priority calls, even when the county dispatcher came back to advise
that the female party was calling back for an ETA on police arrival,
stating she had been thrown to the ground by her husband. All Skelton
did was ask the county to see if the State Police could back up the New
Hanover officer. This is not the type of decision making I would expect
from a 13-year veteran of any other department, other than Limerick
Township P.D.
This incident was another in a long line of incidents which I have
witnessed during my seven years with Limerick. I would characterize the
(lack of) action by Skelton and Bartok as cowardice. I know I am not
alone in my assessment of their actions. Further, they think nothing of
tapping the resources of New Hanover P.D. and the State Police, because
neither Skelton or Bartok wants to go to a potentially dangerous call.
I believe the Limerick Township Police Department Standard Operating
Procedure (SOP) calls for strong sanctions, perhaps even termination,
against officers when they are derelict in their duty. This incident
typifies the cowardice and laziness to which I was witness for many
years. My fight, as well as the fight by other officers of integrity,
was met with contempt and hostility by Chief W. Douglas Weaver, and
eventually led to my resignation, Officer Jeff Bealer's resignation and
Sgt. William Schlichter's resignation. In your newspaper article, W.
Douglas Weaver is quoted as saying " in any job, there are bound to be
employees that are malcontent and disgruntled". This is Weaver's
characterization of those officers who believed that ethical, moral,
and courageous behavior was the first requirement of being a police
officer. Three of those "disgruntled" officers left, not because they
wanted to, but because Limerick afforded no recourse for the minority
of officers who believe in these values.
Why do the actions of these officers and this department still concern
me? Because I became a police officer so that I could provide for my
family, offer the experience to others that I had learned in from my
own mistakes in my earlier life, and be a productive member of society,
make a contribution to a community, and provide service to my country,
by defending the Constitution of the United States, and the
Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Upon graduating the
Police Academy at the age of 36, I had offers from several police
departments. I chose Limerick Township in which to work, because of
it's developing growth and mix of business and residential composition.
I was not able to fulfill my desire to continue to work in Limerick,
because of the issues I have addressed here, but I cannot stop caring
about the officers for whom I have respect and still want to assist, as
well as the residents for whom I respect and believe deserve a much
better police department, than they have now.
I have to speak out against what I believe to be unethical and cowardly
behavior, even though I am no longer a Limerick Township Police
Officer, because I invested a great deal of myself into that department
and community, and I still carry a strong sense of responsibility to
both. Someone must right the wrongs of the Limerick Township Police
Department, because we as citizens of his country, cannot allow law
enforcement officers to abuse, or ignore, their duties to those in need
of service, as well as those who pay their salaries.
Yours,
Paul M. Kennedy
====================================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pig Will" <pig...@MOOSE-MAIL.COM>
To: <LIM...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 10:54 AM
Subject: [LIM-SF] Limerick Police Department & LImerick Township
> I was given a suggestion this morning after showing my letter to
> District Attorney Bruce Castor to people at the new restaurant in
> Oaks. Because Limerick has the nuke plant we need maximum police
> protection.
>
> Everyone on this forum should contact the following.....
>
> Keith Martin
> Director, Pennsylvania Office of Homeland Security
> 717-651-2715
> Fax: 717-651-2040
> http://www.homelandsecurity.state.pa.us
> efre...@state.pa.us
>
> as well as Reps Dailey, Crahalla and Cong. Rafferty.
> mda...@pahousegop.com, Indepen...@aol.com, jraf...@pasen.gov
> Our elected officials need to help investigate Limerick for our
> protection.
>
> Write them today. We are already at a level orange.
> Do we have adequate police protection without a chief, a sergeant and
> vacancies?
>
> Maybe we need state police mobilized to help whatever officers remain?
>