Media left unanswered questions about sheriff's investigation and conclusions in Cheney shooting incident
SUMMARY: Media reports regarding when the Kenedy County Sheriff's department actually interviewed Vice President Dick Cheney have varied widely and have sometimes conflicted, a fact that the media themselves have largely ignored.
Media reports concerning when the sheriff's department of Kenedy County, Texas, actually interviewed Vice President Dick Cheney about his accidental shooting of a hunting companion have varied widely, with little attention on the part of the media to the fact that reports have been inconsistent. Moreover, the media have virtually ignored the consequences of what the latest reports indicate was a 14-hour delay in the department's interviewing of Cheney about the incident. As a result, media have, by and large, simply reported without challenge assertions by law enforcement officials about what happened and have not noted how evidence might have been compromised by the delay. For example, media outlets have reported that law enforcement officials say that alcohol was not involved in the incident -- without noting that the officials are presumably relying on the word of Cheney and the others involved and without noting that interviewing the parties immediately after the incident would have presumably produced direct evidence on this question.
Though most reports now indicate that the sheriff's department chose not to question Cheney until Sunday, February 12, at 8 a.m. ET -- 14 hours after the shooting -- several different accounts have emerged. On February 14, The New York Times reported that Sheriff Ramon Salinas III "said the Secret Service called him shortly after the shooting occurred" and that Salinas sent chief deputy Gilbert San Miguel "to the Armstrong Ranch that night. He said Mr. Sanmiguel interviewed Mr. Cheney and reported that the shooting was an accident."
But the Times' February 14 report conflicted with other news reports from that day, which indicated that a law enforcement official had been barred from the Armstrong Ranch the night of the shooting. The Washington Post reported on February 14:
Local law enforcement officials did not interview Cheney until Sunday morning, about 14 hours after the shooting, in an agreement worked out between the Secret Service and Kenedy County Sheriff Ramon Salinas III. Secret Service spokesman Eric Zahren said at least one deputy was turned away shortly after the shooting because security personnel at the ranch were not aware of the agreement between the sheriff and the Secret Service.
On February 15, the Times also reported that Cheney had not been interviewed until Sunday. But the Times added that Salinas had claimed to have dispatched a deputy to the ranch on Saturday and that Zahren disputed that claim. The Times did not account for the discrepancy between this report and Salinas's previous reported claim that an interview took place Saturday night:
While there were reports, some from the sheriff himself, that a deputy had been dispatched to the ranch on Saturday night and been turned away, Mr. Zahren said that some local police officers had heard about the shooting on a scanner when an ambulance was sent to pick up Mr. Whittington. They showed up at the ranch unsolicited. Private guards, not Secret Service agents, Mr. Zahren said, turned the police away because they did not know anything had occurred.
A February 14 Dallas Morning News article reported what was apparently a third version of events offered by Salinas, noting that "Sheriff Salinas said he decided Saturday night not to send anyone to the ranch and added that he was relying on information from others that it was an accident." A February 15 Dallas Morning News article offered a similar account, quoting Zahren as saying, "It was at the sheriff's request that somebody come out the following morning, which we facilitated and passed through to the vice president's office."
Media reports have not explained why Salinas's reported accounts of his department's efforts to interview Cheney have varied so dramatically, nor have they adequately addressed questions raised by the fact that Cheney was apparently not interviewed until 14 hours after the shooting.
On February 13, San Miguel announced that "[t]here was no alcohol, no misconduct on anyone's part." In a February 14 interview with Texas Monthly magazine executive editor Paul Burka, Keith Olbermann -- host of MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann -- questioned the basis for this conclusion, given the 14-hour delay in interviewing Cheney:
OLBERMANN: The sheriff's office, though, issued a statement last night, in the conclusion that there -- this was an accident, and also said no alcohol had been involved in it. But how would they know that? The sheriff's office did not interview the vice president for 14 hours after all this happened. And the lower-ranking sheriff's officers who did not know about the scheduling of that interview for Sunday morning had been turned away when they tried to talk to Mr. Cheney on Saturday night.
BURKA: Well, obviously, that question -- that's one of many questions that we don't know the answer to. But, you know, guns and alcohol don't mix. But they have been known to, on hunting trips. Usually the alcohol is after the hunting trip, not before.
A February 14 Associated Press article noted that according to San Miguel, the "investigation had found that alcohol was not a factor in the shooting, but he would not elaborate about how that had been determined."
The February 15 Dallas Morning News article, moreover, quoted a ballistics consultant who criticized local authorities for failing to investigate the scene of the shooting on the night it occurred:
But Ronald R. Scott, a retired Massachusetts state trooper who now consults in ballistics cases, said the investigators erred by not going to the ranch on Saturday night. Investigators probably lost their chance to recreate the scene of the shooting, he said.
"I think that is improper to be quite honest," Scott said. "Even if there was no wrongdoing, it is still improper not to do it."
But other media reports have simply repeated the sheriff's department's conclusions. On the February 14 broadcast of ABC's Nightline, for instance, senior White House correspondent Martha Raddatz reported that Texas authorities said "they were told that there was no alcohol involved" and that "[t]here was no mishandling of any of the equipment or the rifles." Raddatz did not note the delay in interviewing Cheney:
TERRY MORAN (co-anchor): Martha, there's more coming to light, it seems, about the investigation into this shooting. How did Texas authorities handle this incident? And is there any evidence that the vice president got special treatment during this investigation?
RADDATZ: Well, the Texas authorities say they interviewed the vice president. They also say the investigation is over. They actually said they were told that there was no alcohol involved. There was no mishandling of any of the equipment or the rifles or anything like that. But it ended very quickly, Terry. I have to assume that some small town Texas officials, when they're met by Dick Cheney, are a little taken aback. But the truth is, Terry, we don't know the answers to all these things yet.
Similarly, as Lawrence O'Donnell has pointed out on the Huffington Post weblog, a February 14 Los Angeles Times article quoted San Miguel as saying that "[t]here was no alcohol or misconduct." Though the Times noted later in the article that "no one from that agency [the sheriff's office] interviewed Cheney until Sunday morning," it did not question the basis for San Miguel's conclusions.
According to Fox News' Washington managing editor Brit Hume, who interviewed Cheney on February 15, Cheney acknowledged that on the day of the shooting, "he had a beer at lunch, and that had been many hours earlier."















Right now, I'm listening to Tony Blankley on Tweety's show saying "There's no story here."
Yeah, right.
Cheney would not permit questions from the local authorities.
Cheney would not allow questions from anyone other than the Head Teleprompter-Reader at a Rovian propaganda outlet.
The doctors won't talk about Whittington's blood-alcohol level.
The "eye witness" hand-picked by Dickie to pass this to the press (and to America) can't get her story straight. First, she saw it happen but later she "saw the Secret Sevice running toward where the Vice President was", then, then....
Why the injured man was taken to a podunk hospital over bad roads, rather than a hospital in Corpus Christi (which was closer). Good thing he didn't die on the way, huh?
Why the Secret Service obstructed an obvious member of Texas law enforcement from entering the premises and conducting an interview (when they surely had probable cause to enter if someone was attempting to interfere with their inquiry).
Why the Secret Service is not putting forward the agents that were on the scene to be interviewed as corroborative witnesses to the event as described by Cheney's friends. Ditto Cheney's team of "heart wranglers": why haven't we heard from them? WE'RE PAYING FOR THEM!!!
How such a tight a grouping of birdshot of an appropriate size to hunt quail fired from more than (what is the story now? 90 yards? 30 yards? 10 yards?) wound up in the injured man. Must be the $50,000 shotgun.
I have other things I'm wondering about, but I'd like to see where this goes.
Ronald R. Scott, retired Massachusetts state trooper who now consults in ballistics cases, said, "Even if there was no wrongdoing, it is still improper not to do it (a timely investigation)."
Mr. Scott misses the point. It is ESPECIALLY important to have a full and timely investigation, IF THERE WAS NO WRONGDOING. This gives official exoneration to the parties involved.
The ONLY reason to thwart such an investigation is if it is believed that such an exoneration would not be provided, when all facts are viewed!
Leaving everything hazy and based on "trusting" the perps, all that uncertainty, is preferrable to being CERTAIN that criminal negligence was involved.
Ted Kennedy... Ted Kennedy... Ted Kennedy... Ted Kennedy... Ted Kennedy...
Do you feel better yet? No? OK...
Ted Kennedy... Ted Kennedy... Ted Kennedy...
i will not be questioned. mary matalin just on the today show. katie asked if it was not a little odd to have the owner of the ranch call a local paper. oh no insisted mary, she was an expert hunter and an eyewitness. the vp's office exists for what then? love begala and carville, and it must be true opposites attract.
Rhandi Rhodes said last night that, the VP of the US shooting a guy in the face with a shotgun was the least nefarious thing that has occured during this administration. She's probably right.
In the wake of a fake war, illegale wiretapping, fraud, torture, graft, treason, the deaths of thousands of service men and women, as well as civilians in the US...an "accidental" shooting is almost like comic relief.
If the Republicans are perfectly OK with Cheney's behavior in the aftermath of an "accidental shooting", let's just make it the Law of the Land.
Let's change Law Enforcement guidelines to allow shooters, who claim that their shooting of another person was "accidental", to have 14 hours' grace period during which they cannot be questioned, seen, or examined.
The 14th Amendment requires, CONSTITUTIONALLY, that citizens in America be afforded EQUAL PROTECTION under the LAW.
If it's OK for Cheney to avoid confronting law enforcement officials for 14 hours, this courtesy should be extended to ALL Americans.
The Democrats need to put this forward in a new "CHENEY GRACE PERIOD Bill", and get their fellow Congresspersons to debate the issue, pros and cons.
Let's see if the Republicans are willing to say that not only is Cheney not above the law, but that he and all American citizens should be treated exactly the same.
Think it would fly?
Isn't that already the law in Florida? >:]
Let’s see: 1. Private guards turn away sheriff’s deputies responding to an intercepted call for an ambulance to come to the scene of a shooting. Hmm.
2. Sheriff works out deal with secret service (who are under the command of … the vice president? ) to delay interviewing the vice president long enough for … what? A good night’s sleep?
3. Based on today’s news, the vice president a) did, b) did not (depending on who of the original participants and/or local police officers after their thorough investigation, is telling the story) have “a beer” before the accident and “a cocktail” after the shooting. Hmm. Guess it is safe to drink after a shooting, provided you have told your Secret Service to not let any police officers come near you for the next 14 hours.
4. There was/was not any alcohol consumed depending on whether you ask the question before or after someone decided to ask about Whittington’s blood alcohol level. Hmm. Do you suppose someone remembered the semen stained dress?
5. When Clinton shot Monica, the FBI investigated him and at Ken Starr’s urging, the courts required his Secret Service agents to testify. So, will there be an investigation of this shooting, and will the agents be sworn as witnesses?
Not. You have to have control of the legislature to have an investigation, and you have to be a member of the other party to be investigated.
Thinking back to the folks I've represented or filed civil actions against, those who had only had "a beer," and left the scene or declined a b/a test ... yes, the judges and juries were most sympathetic with those non vice-presidential types, every time.
But there is a sure-fire defense: if the glove doesn't fit...
I'm serious, and I fear you're being sarcastic.
If you are pulled over for what an officer says is "erratic driving", and wishes to discover if you have been drinking, you should just give him your home address and tell him to come around sometime the next morning. Now that we have the CHENEY PRECEDENT for CITIZENS, then the officer should be required by statute to HONOR this "grace period" and no longer attempt to gather evidence of impairment.
If Cheney gets 14 hours, there is absolutely no reason why this should not apply to all Americans. Unless, of course, we have set aside the Constitution and become some sort of authoritarian Monarchy, whereby our administration officials do not have to follow any law like the rest of us.