Code of silence: County clams up when cops open fire

Two days after a 21-year-old Crozet man was shot dead by an Albemarle police officer on June 8, officials finally released his name. Neither Albemarle police nor Virginia State Police, which is investigating the case, responded to a request for the name of the officer who used lethal force.

That's not too much of a surprise in Albemarle County, where if you shoot someone and are not charged, your secret is pretty much safe. The Albemarle County Police Department has developed a practice of protecting the identities of shooters, and they say they're backed up by the Freedom of Information Act.


Some find this troubling when those firing guns and wounding– or in this case, killing– people are county employees. "Everything the government does is our business," says attorney Debbie Wyatt, who successfully sued Albemarle police for a 1997 shooting. "It's your law enforcement; it's my law enforcement."


Gregory Allen Rosson's death June 8 on Afton Mountain is the second shooting by an Albemarle cop in two weeks and the third in six months. When two officers showed up at Birdwood Court May 26, it took four days for any information to come out about why county cops had wounded a man in a quiet, kid-filled city neighborhood. When information was released, it was from the city police department, which is conducting the criminal investigation, not the county.

"Anytime an officer discharges a weapon, they're put on paid administrative leave," says Albemarle police spokesperson Carter Johnson. That was the case also for the officer who was involved in a shooting on Rio Mills Road December 26, which was later determined to be a murder-suicide.

"We only conducted internal investigations for both of those cases, and it is not our practice to release personnel files or information from internal affairs," says Johnson, when the names of the gunfiring officers are requested. "This information is protected under the Freedom of Information Act."

Virginia FOIA code also says that information may be disclosed under the discretion of the custodian.

"That's right," says Albemarle police chief Colonel Steve Sellers. "I choose not to disclose."

While internal affairs investigations are indeed exempt under FOIA, the Freedom of Information Advisory Council's Alan Gernhardt says information is sometimes released "after a public outcry or pressure put on by the press." As for whether it's good policy to withhold the names of police officers involved in shootings, suggests Gernhardt, "Bring it up with the legislature."

Ironically, while the identity of the officer who fired his weapon in the Rio Mills standoff is still a secret if you ask for it from county police under FOIA, four officers were publicly identified and praised for their roles in the incident at a May 23 police banquet. Officer Andy Gluba, Corporal Kanie Richardson and officers Jason Marden and William Underwood— the latter later revealed to have wounded Josue Salinas Valdez a week after the banquet at Birdwood Court, according to a May 30 Charlottesville Police Department release— all received Albemarle police's highest honor, the valor award, for their roles in the Rio Mills stand-off.

"You were invited to that event," says Sellers, who refuses to tell a reporter on the phone the identity of the officers he had publicly honored.

Fortunately, from other media accounts about the banquet, one can learn a little about what happened at Rio Mills. The Daily Progress reports that Frank Davis Jr. raised a gun at Gluba, who fired in self-defense and missed. Davis killed James Marshall and then himself, and the Virginia State Police, which investigated the deaths, cleared Gluba, according to the Progress. But the Hook was unable to independently verify that with state police, which referred a reporter back to Albemarle police and Denise Lunsford, the Albemarle commonwealth's attorney, who did not return a phone call from the Hook.

Officer Gluba has been involved in at least three other shootings, according to court documents and a neighbor's complaint. On January 9, 2000, he shot a neighbor's lab mix, Astro, and admitted the shooting, according to Astro's owner, Tory Sperry. She pressed  charges, she told the Hook, but they were dismissed because Gluba contended he had not been read his Miranda rights. He told the Hook in 2006 he shot Astro because the dog came onto his property with a pack and threatened Ingo, the Albemarle K-9 officer who was killed in the second Gluba-involved shooting.

In that 2004 incident, B&E suspect Robert Lee Cooke was pursued by responding officers Gluba and Ingo. Cooke and Ingo were both injured by gunfire, and Ingo had to be euthanized. Cooke was left paralyzed by Gluba's bullet, according to court documents, and was sentenced to 10 years in prison for maliciously wounding the police K-9 and possessing a gun as a felon, according to court records.

And on New Year's Day 2010, Gluba was one of seven cops involved in a shoot-out with 18-year-old Colby Eppard, who stole a Greene County police cruiser and led police on a nearly 70-mile chase before being blasted by police on Route 20 south, according to a letter written by Albemarle Commonwealth's Attorney Lunsford. She cleared all officers, but refused to release the number of bullets that riddled Eppard's body when asked by a reporter.

Gluba also turns up in a lawsuit in Albemarle Circuit Court filed by James Francis Phillips of Arrington that claims during a November 29, 2006, traffic stop, Gluba ordered Phillips to the ground, where he was attacked by a K-9, and severely injured on his face, stomach and arm, according to the suit. Phillips later committed suicide, says his attorney, and the suit did not move forward.  

Gluba, who no longer works in the K-9 unit, according to police spokesperson Johnson, declined a Hook request for an interview.

County police's refusal to release names of officers involved in shootings disturbs Rutherford Institute founder John Whitehead and author of the just-released A Government of Wolves: The Emerging Police State.

"I would want to know who those cops are," he says. "Wouldn't you? If we live in a democracy and they're shooting people, we should know."

Whitehead cites the case of former Culpeper cop Daniel Harmon-Wright, who was convicted for shooting unarmed Patricia Cook in a church parking lot. "They knew this guy was dangerous," says Whitehead. "There is a danger to citizens. Why would they hide that? The key to free government is transparency."

Culpeper police refused to release Harmon-Wright's name for three months, and it was eventually leaked to the Free Lance-Star. Harmon-Wright was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and two other charges in May and sentenced to three years in prison.

That department came under the scrutiny of a federal judge for what he called "outrageous misconduct" in the handling of a capital murder conviction against Michael Hash, who is suing officers and the former commonwealth's attorney for wrongful imprisonment for the nearly 12 years he spent in prison.

FOIA request: Denied
Albemarle police protect not only their officers, but also citizens who shoot other citizens. When a Glenmore woman was wounded in her yard in 2010 by nearby target shooters, no charges were brought and county police refused to identify the errant-aiming target-practicer. Nearly two years later, police again denied a FOIA request seeking the identity of the shooter, claiming it was exempt as a criminal investigative file.

Colonel Sellers rejects the idea that his department conceals woundings by police, and notes that the Birdwood Court shooting is the first since he took the position as police chief in January 2011. He says the release of information is determined case by case. "If it's in the community interest," he says, "that far outweighs protection of the officer's family.

Sellers, who spoke to the Hook before Rosson was shot, lists five "bullet-points" that can stymie the release of information from shootings by police. "First, I'm not going to influence the outcome of a police investigation before it's concluded, as at Birdwood," he says. "We need to look at facts and interview witnesses. We don't want a story going out that would distort their recall."

He also cites the need to investigate the original crime that brought the officer to the shooting scene in the first place. In the Birdwood Court shooting, Charlottesville police say the two Albemarle officers were investigating a felony hit-and-run.

Besides the criminal investigation, there's also an administrative investigation. An officer can refuse to incriminate himself in the former, but not in the latter, explains Sellers. "I've got to be very, very careful the criminal and administrative investigations don't infringe on each other."

He also considers the human side of tragedies in which an officer uses deadly force. "You have just brushed up with death," says Sellers. "In some cases, it's devastating." And the officer's family is impacted as well, he adds.

Finally, the chief says, he does a threat assessment to determine whether there's risk of retaliation against the officer, and that's a factor in releasing information as well.

"I want to lay out as much information as fast as I can," he insists. "It's easy for conspiracy theories to perk up." One frustration, he says, is having to wait for the criminal investigation, the commonwealth's attorney, and the grand jury before information can be released.

"I will be transparent and as forthright as I can when misconduct occurs," says Sellers. "You saw that when we arrested one of our own officers."

In December, a 27-year Albemarle police veteran, Lieutenant Ernie Allen, was arrested for felony embezzlement when $380 went missing from the petty cash he managed. Allen was convicted of misdemeanor embezzling in February and sentenced to 10 days in jail, according to Albemarle County District Court records.

Sellers says the threat of lawsuits is not a factor in concealing the identity of an officer who fires at someone, although history shows such suits are possible.

In 2006, a jury found Albemarle County Police Department officer Amos Chiarappa "grossly negligent" in the 1997 fatal shooting of Frederick Gray in Squire Hill Apartments, and awarded Gray's family $4.5 million.

County police had another high-profile suspect-shooting in 2001, when Officer Raleigh Anderson was reported to have fired upon and killed William L. Wingfield Jr., 46, who had lunged at another officer with a pitchfork when they responded to a domestic call to his residence on Old Lynchburg Road, according to the Daily Progress, which also reported his mother said he had a history of  mental illness. Then commonwealth's attorney Jim Camblos cleared Anderson in that shooting. 

Sellers denies that potential police department embarrassment is a factor in withholding information, although history shows that, too, is possible.

Perhaps coincidentally, the last dashcam video the Hook ever received from Albemarle police went viral on YouTube. That was the infamous November 5, 2007, tape that showed Officer Greg C. Davis, with the Black Eyed Peas "My Humps" playing inside his police cruiser, appear to strike artist Gerry Mitchell with his cruiser as Mitchell crossed West Main in his wheelchair in a crosswalk.

Davis was not charged in the incident, although he accompanied a Charlottesville police officer to Mitchell's hospital room where Mitchell was charged with failure to obey a pedestrian signal. Discovery in a  civil lawsuit later suggested that Davis may have been texting as he plowed into Mitchell. 

Mitchell died four years later, just two months after the county settled the $850,000 lawsuit he filed for an undisclosed amount. He had AIDS, but his doctors claimed his condition was exacerbated by injuries he suffered when he was struck in the crosswalk.

Subsequent FOIAs to Albemarle police for dashcam footage from the Hook have all been denied, even one last year that was shown in court of Officer Andrew Holmes rear-ending a stopped car on Barracks Road, an incident for which he was convicted of improper driving, according to court records. Authorities have said at least eight police dashcams were operating during the Colby Eppard shooting in 2010. Hook FOIA requests for those tapes? Denied.

Also no longer released: Albemarle police officer official photographs.

Attorney Wyatt, who also represented Mitchell in his civil suit, is outraged that county police are denying FOIA requests concerning possible criminal acts using an exemption for personnel records. "What if there was some cop out there shooting someone every day, and as long as they clear him, they don't have to say who it is," she suggests.

"How else can we monitor how the system works?" she asks. "Everything the government does is our information. That acting like it's not your business— I think [Sellers] is completely wrong."

Supervisor Ken Boyd was surprised to learn that Albemarle police were not disclosing the identity of Officer Gluba, who reportedly fired his weapon at Rio Mills. "I just got back from a police banquet where they honored this officer," he says.

Boyd says he understands the need for care when police gather evidence, but adds, "Generally speaking, I'm in favor of transparency in government."

As for the Birdwood Court shooting, says Boyd, "I believe the public does deserve to know what happened."

Back to Birdwood Court
Early March 16, gunfire broke out on Second Street NW outside the Elks Lodge (and across the street from the Hook) and two men were left bleeding in the street, one of them wounded by Charlottesville police Officer Alex Bruner. Later that same morning, Charlottesville police Chief Tim Longo held a press conference, offered details of the shooting and identified Bruner, who was put on administrative leave and has since been cleared of any wrongdoing.

City police spokeman Ronnie Roberts cautions about comparing the police candor in the Elks Lodge shootings and what happened on Birdwood Court. "Those are two different scenarios and two different typles of investigations," he says. "The first had an independent witness."

Three days after the May 26 Birdwood shooting, Roberts said he couldn't release the name of the Albemarle officer or the victim because, he was told, "It could compromise the investigation."

Four days after the shooting, Roberts released a statement around 3pm May 30 that revealed two Albemarle police officers— William Underwood and James Herring— went to 105 Birdwood Court to investigate a felony hit-and-run. A struggle ensued with resident Josue Salinas Valdez, age 38, and Underwood fired, according to the release.

At press time, nearly two weeks after the shooting, no charges have been filed and no further information has been released. Whether Salinas Valdez was armed is still unknown.

"I would ask people to be patient," says Colonel Sellers. "It takes time to investigate, and that exacerbates the perception of a cover-up. We want to have all our T's crossed and I's dotted."

Birdwood Court residents just want to know how a neighbor came to be shot by police on a quiet, holiday Sunday night.

"It's completely bizarre," says the homeowners association president Laura Rydin, who was watching a movie with her kids when gunfire erupted.  Two days after the shooting, she said, "We're trying to figure out what's going on. We're hoping police issue a statement because this is a very quiet neighborhood and so many families live here. We'd like an explanation."

More than a week later, she says, "We're still waiting for some sort of statement from the police to our neighborhood, but nothing so far."

Days after the Afton shooting, there's a similar pattern, with some who knew Rosson asking why deadly force had to be used in the encounter with police.

If history's a teacher, it could be a while before those questions are answered— if they ever are.

Correction 6/13: In the original version, Alan Gernhardt's affiliation was misidentified. He's with the Freedom of Information Advisory Council.


If the Chief of Police cannot find a balance that satisfies the public than the public should demand thast he be fired and replaced with someone a little less arrogant.

The current policy does not strike the proper balance between disclosure to the public and protection of the Officers and investigations and everybody knows it.

So will Ken Boyd sit on his hands or actually do something that protects the public?

I completely disagree with the mindset espoused in this article. If an officer is found guilty of wrongdoing, then the public has a right to know. However, if they are completely cleared of any wrongdoing, publicly smearing their name has no purpose other than eliciting harassment and vengeful responses toward that officer and potentially their children/families. I am a neighbor and friend of one of the officers named in this article, and I can wholeheartedly say that I would trust this individual 100% with my life or the lives of my children. These officers are individuals just like the rest of us, only they have chosen to work in a position in which they have to put their own lives on the line every day to protect the rest of us. They go to work each day not knowing if the next person they pull over during a routine traffic stop is going to pull a gun on them or the next domestic violence situation they intervene in is going to end their life. The nature of their job requires that they be able to defend themselves or others when the situation arises. If an officer's actions are reviewed and it is determined that they did not commit any wrongdoing, then they do not deserve to be publicly chastised.

It seems to me that every time a citizen is shot by a police officer that the family ALWAYS claims that the shooting was unnecessary. Really? So THIS is why the police department keeps the shooting officer's name private, to protect him or her from retaliation.

I'm for that. If an investigation shows some wrong-doing by the officer, then release the name. Or after a long enough period of time has elapsed where the so-called agrieved parties can settle down enough to not go after an officer. BTW, the next-of-kin will know who the officer was, but not the public.

The police have lost a lot of respect over the past 20 years because hey have too much power and too many protections. They are overly aggressive and taught to shoot to kill. This mindset is not just here it is nationwide. When people are pulled over there is a presumption of guilt on the Officers part and people are often spoken to in harsh tones with no mutual respect shown. If someone rolls through a stop sign and there is no dangerous situation created then do the job and write the ticket but there is no reason to treat people like dogs. It is not the Officers place anymore than it is the person at the DMVs place to admonsish you for not filling out a form properly. When an officer gives an instruction and a person askes for a reason there is simply no harm in the Officer telling him or her why he is giving them a direct order and then explaing if the do not cooperate he will have to use force. Most people will copperate at that point and those that do not get what they asked for. It is unamerican to simply have a person with a badge order you around without at least naming what the probable cause is and there is no harm in doing so. If more officers showed more respect then people would be more supportive of them when they do need to get rough.

Bill Marshall, what power does a police officer truly have? They arrest a perp, the perp obtains an attorney and somehow pleads down our out of the charges. Now, there seems to be a whole lot of incidents especially since this article seems to mesh both the City and County PD and span over a period of seven years.

The mother and sister of the man shot and killed on Afton claim he had no history of violence, yet he was due in court the day after his death on a charge of assaulting a police officer? His sister went further to say this guy had multiple personalities and his ex-girlfriend is the one that "brought them out"? Yet he charged the officer, he was beating his ex-girlfriend? Blame everyone or everything else, it is the American way.

And if my child or sibling was shot and killed, I would not be granting an interview of the local news. I would want to know what happened and I would not defend them when they were beating someone or charging a police officer.

The trouble Mr. Marshall, few respect the law or law enforcement. No one shows them respect, yet you expect them to show respect, which they do. I have spoken with many local police officers and never had one disrespect me.

There is always more to the story here and even The Hook isn't getting it all. And if you are not getting the hole story - stop the speculation.

C'Ville Native, you are correct..... for the most part. But the city and county both have a few who have no idea how to talk to the public they deal with. This few try to provoke people into a physical confrontation. Why you may ask? Because the law on assaulting police officers now carries a mandatory jail sentence. The judge can't even suspend it. I saw one cop push a guy in the back one night because he didn't feel the guy was moving fast enough in leaving the scene after being ordered to do so. The suspect thought the other half of the dispute had pushed him. The suspect turned around and decked the officer. Guess who got the mandatory jail time and had to serve every day of it? Technically, the cop was guilty of assault. Who would write the arrest warrant though? NOBODY!!!

"Due in court" means never tried, never found guilty, and thus innocent. The "no history of violence" claim is not challenged in any way shape or form by the fact that he was "Due in court". Rosson probably instinctually ran at the threat when a tazer or gun was drawn and he saw intent to kill in the cops eyes. I've seen that crazed, predatory look and had tazers drawn on me from the very moment I woke up from sleeping peacefully in my bed. And they'll charge you with assault on a God if you raise your arm instinctually in self defense while they're beating you with their batons. What's the dead police dog have to do with this story, anyway? Absolutely nothing. It's propaganda.

OK, my mistake I was just looking at the pictures. That's right - 10 years in jail after the cop shoots and paralyzes you for life for hurting his doggy. And if you try to sue the cop who's already shot three people and is probably gonna shoot three more before he retires, you "commit suicide". Sounds suspicious to say the least.

It's a shame you all are requiring identifying information with these post. Will you be turning the information over to those who complain about the content of a particular post?

Oh what the hey. The three Albemarle County officers mentioned are good officers. They are mature officers, I would never classify as "gung ho". The paralyzed individual was, in no way, an upstanding citizen. I know of him too. I might go as far to say, he got what he deserved. Though I did not know the latest deceased male, I'm sure his girlfriend could tell you things about him that would make your head spin. She's probably had more than a few violent encounters with him.

There are bad cops out there. There are departments that cover for those bad cops. I don't think either is the case in most of the incidents

you highlighted. We call these officers because we need their assistance. We can't dictate how they render that assistance. We have to trust that they will make the right split second decisions. Do we really feel we could do a better job? NO!

Another disappointing article by our liberal rag paper. That is five minutes of my life wasted. Good job ACPD! I wouldn't want a police officer's job, but I realize there are times they must fire their weapons. The details will come out in time. Of course the family of "he's a good boy - give you the shirt of his back" type of guy is always the one with the criminal record and history of violence. But my, he was just an angel wasn't he?

C-ville native, I wasn't second guessing any Police officers action, I understand the need for lethal force. My point is that Officers have way more than the power of arrest. They have the right to verbally and physically abuse people without retribution. When people file complaints and the Officer was found to have used justified force or not and that is all we hear the rest is a "personall matter" I say BS. If a cop is overzealous than but still within the confines of the law then it should be public knowledge that this officer was ruled as out of line but within the law so that the Officers who are pushing the envelope get fired for simply being poor performers. No different than a Nuurse at a Doctors office who show zero compassion but "does her job" He or she should still be fired or reassigned.

When a Policeman is in a confrontational situation he should pretend for a moment that his gun is not an option and ask himself what he would do in that scenario. His motivation would then be to descalate the situation and perhaps no one has to die or even get hurt. In Costco in Sterling Va a worker went crazy and was thrteatening people with a knife and the Cop shot and killed her in front of customers. I was not there, but I would think if cops were unavailable they would have maybe figured out a way to take down a woman with a knife. She was in costco... they could have bum rushed her with the big orange carts, tossed giant cans of food at her attacked her with a matttress and sprayed her with the 100 or so fire extinguishers they sell. Being a Police Officer can be a very risky job and sometimes they need to shoot to kill but they have been given too much power in America to abuse the public and it it out there on youtube everyday for all to see. They circle the wagons like they did with Gerry in the wheelchair when there was simply no do so and it makes people not trust them. Its not that complicated. Be polite until there is a need to be aggressive. Don't let other officers get away with abusing citizens and don't hide behind personell files. The internet is not their friend and the truth will come out and when it does it just like with Gerry the Departments reputation will be damaged 10 times worse. They need to accept responsibility to be accountable or spend half their day trying to erase the internet. Everyone has a videophone now.

Is it me or has there been a palpable change in The Hook's objectivity--or lack thereof--since new management assumed power?
Also, can the author of this article divulge if the police beat reporter accepted the invitation from ACPD to attend the awards banquet that was recently held? The implication in the article is that no one from The Hook took up Sellers on his invite; is that true?

R.I.P.: Jim Ramp

Liberalace are reporters now obliged to accept every invitation they receive? Seems like a pretty dull and self serving event if you ask me and I can't see why information that can be freely shared at a police banquet should be withheld from reporters who later ask legitimate questions about the same subject regardless of whether they attended or not.

@Bill it seems pretty clear. first time a police officer steps out of policy and someone gets a little boo-boo they, and their family will be up in arms and will soon be found in the company of lawyers.

@saywha. Not sure if I see a news reporter in this articule or someone with an obvious axe to grind and agenda to fill. If the office in question knows that whatever they say will be slanted then the best way to handle such is no comment.

As to Attorney Wyatt, I am pretty sure by the time an officer had shot his 23rd person in 23 days that something would have happened. Perhaps if she looked at the P & P of officer invovled shooting she might see something interesting, although not news friendly enough for this opinion piece and her politics...

@saywha...One of the best places to find out information and get real dirt (not prepackaged baloney from a spokesperson) is by hanging out them. This is how an actual "reporter"--when there was such a thing--would develop sources, get unedited facts and otherwise learn enough about story subjects to himself be considered a valid news reporter. If I were a crime reporter, this would be a must-see event for me.

If reporters never attended events because they were "self-serving, dull" functions, then no one would ever attend a press conference, presidential address, etc.

This is just a lazy town (no offense to the Icelandic kids' show featuring Sportacus as the hero and Robbie Rotten as the villain) when it comes to news.

And look, I am not defending the cops. But call a spade a spade: If you want to see the journalistic bias against cops in this area, just look at last Sunday's Daily Progress. They had a special insert supplement spotlighting "community heroes." They featured fire departments, police, ER nurses, etc. The three photos they chose for the cover?
1. A sympathetic firefighter with a radio up to his face.
2. A nurse caring for a patient.
3. A tight closeup of a cop's hand reaching around the grip of his sidearm to remove it from the holster.

That's not bias?

R.I.P.: John Africa (On 'da MOVE!)

I know one of the officers mentioned in the article and find him to be the one of the kindest, gentlest, most sensitive adults that I know. I too would trust him completely in any situation. He is a good man and a great father. Knowing him, I have no doubt that any incident where deadly force was used by him was completely justified. Reading this article, however, one would never know this.

Seems that most of these posts miss a large point of this article entirely. Even if all these officer are the BEST, KINDEST, most SENSITIVE, most PATIENT, best TRAINED, AWARD-WINNING HEROS in the whole world, does the public not have a right to know who-what-when-why when it comes to police shootings? If the officers have all acted as such heroes, they should have no qualms about sharing their actions as public employees. And either way, the public has the right to know. How else can we judge the merit to all the cops-are-the-best-people posts above (not saying they're not).

The courts have ruled that police departments can refuse to hire otherwise qualified candidates as police officers simply because they are intelligent.

Cvillereader2. Obvious answer is NO. In the real world there are nuts, gangsters etc etc that need the name in order to hunt and seek revenge. (remember that 'I heart Jade" nut? Perhaps they seek this revenge on the officers house, weather the officer is there or not. Or if his family is there.

These officers have to take huge risks, for crap money while getting stupid amounts of BS from all types of self absorbed, entitled people ranging from Keswick to the hood.

I can tell you this...if I was dealing with the people in this video I would have taken my baton to more than a few heads...

Some folks obviously have never heard of an agent provacateur so let me explain it. Go to any large protest that threaten's the globalist agenda and you will see undercover cops shouting obscenities and calling for violence against their co-workers in uniform so they can use it as an excuse to shut the protest down partially or entirely. And beat people's heads in with batons.

Jimi Gunner guy: You write: "Cvillereader2. Obvious answer is NO." To what quesion?

You then state: "In the real world there are nuts" Can't argue there. I think your posts prove your case.

You right Jimi - dem fools in dat video need several batons 2 da dome mane

Some folks (machine gunner being a fine example) have never heard that a conjunction goes in the middle of a sentence rather than at the beginning. In the real world, there nuts and there are also the not too bright. Sometimes they are one and the same.

Oh, I've probably heard that a hundred times. And for what it's worth both jimi "machine gunner" hendrix and The Nuge enjoy beginning sentences with conjunctions. I SAID A WANGO TANGO!!!!

cvillereader2, I am talking about one of the officers named in the article. The who, what, when, and why is detailed in the article, so your comment is very curious to me. The article implies that this officer acted in a way that is unprofessional and I am attempting to state my opinion from a position of knowledge. If one formed an opinion simply from reading this article, one could think that this officer enjoys firing his weapon in the line of duty. Knowing this officer the way I do, I can assure that this could not be further from the truth.

I hope that THIS comment clarifies your confusion.

Mr. Meanwhile, thanks for your attempted "clarification." But my comment went to the article's discussion of the apparent default position to deny information by law enforcement. For example, it states, "the identity of the officer who fired his weapon in the Rio Mills standoff is still a secret if you ask for it from county police under FOIA." And it raises the subject of the outrageous refusal to release the Culpepper cop's name for months.

May I ask -- what officer were you talking about when you said, "I am talking about one of the officers." Several officers and their actions were mentioned in the article.

I have personally had reasonable FOIA requests denied in the past. When any law enforcement agency over-reaches, they cover their tracks.