They had their say ... now we have ours: "Citizens for Ethical Treatment of Others"

If a “politically connected” person commits a wrongdoing, is that person any less guilty than any other person who commits a wrongdoing?

To a group of citizens who describe themselves as having “various connections to (suspended Police Chief John) Crone via Rotary, church, Chamber, etc.” – and who signed a letter of support for Crone – the answer to that question is apparently “yes.” The letter, dated July 12 – only four days after Crone was suspended – was written to members of Mooresville’s town board by a group that coins itself “Citizens for Ethical Treatment of Others.” The group claims to “share Crone’s passion for Mooresville and express it via civic involvement and many by investing in the establishment of local businesses.” To view the letter, click on the documents below:






Ironically, the letter acknowledges Crone’s “lack of attention to recordkeeping,” calling it “unfortunate.” However, Crone’s friends apparently do not view the police chief’s “lack of attention to recordkeeping” as sufficient grounds for discipline or dismissal. Instead, they blame the Town of Mooresville, saying that since the town board never oversaw Cops for Kids, “by default” that made the fund “a discretionary account." And they have unilaterally decided to give Crone “enormous latitude in the use of all funds.”

Not only did the group attempt to deflect blame on the Town of Mooresville, however. It also went on to blame the media for exposing the facts surrounding Crone’s mishandling of the Cops for Kids funds. In fact, the “Citizens for Ethical Treatment of Others” characterized the media coverage as a “personal attack on (Crone’s) character.” The group also deflected blame on the Gatton Report and its readers, calling them “anonymous bloggers too cowardice to relinquish their names.”

But the group didn’t stop there. Clearly without reviewing a single financial record for Cops for Kids, the “Citizens for the Ethical Treatment of Others” still felt comfortable stating: “We’re confident Crone will be absolved of all allegations of impropriety” and that “many will owe him a sincere heartfelt apology.”

Several questions come to mind:

• What exactly leads the “Citizens for Ethical Treatment of Others” to believe that just because the town gave Crone minimal guidance, Crone could do whatever he wanted with the Cops for Kids money?


• In regard to the “Citizens for Ethical Treatment of Others” calling this blog and its readers “cowardice”: What is more cowardly – exposing a police chief for misappropriation of funds ... or signing a letter of support for him?


• And exactly what do the “Citizens for Ethical Treatment of Others” propose we will owe Crone an apology for? For exposing his poor record keeping? For showing how he withdrew thousands of dollars in cash out of his “charity fund” but provided little or no documentation for how it was spent? For alerting him that his own website stated that Cops for Kids is a charity for needy children and families when in fact it was being used as his personal “discretionary account”? For showing how the chief law enforcement officer of our town deposited cash from the police department’s evidence room into his “discretionary account”?

Perhaps most striking is the letter’s categorical declaration that “Nothing short of personal use of Cops for Kids proceeds will warrant reprimand or dismissal of Chief Crone.” Is it not “personal use” when Crone takes himself, his wife, and his daughter on expensive trips, including transportation, hotels, meals, and sightseeing fees?

The writer of the letter, and those who signed it, set a very low threshold for dismissal; yet even by their own standards, they should agree that Crone is already guilty. Why? Because of cash withdrawals. Either Crone produces proof that none of that cash was used for his “personal use,” or it must be presumed that it was. Why? Because he is the one who withdrew the cash. And to this date, we have yet to see exactly how Crone spent the thousands and thousands of dollars in cash that he withdrew from a charity fund.

Would the businessmen who signed this letter tolerate such behavior from an employee? Would Crone, a chief of police, buy his own explanations if he were interrogating a potential charity scam artist? Perhaps what this letter reveals is that maybe he would … if the suspect went to his church, or attended his Rotary Club, or was a member of the Chamber of Commerce.

But obviously, to these particular 21 people, there’s no interest in, or room for, the evidence. Since they are businessmen and members of various civic organizations, they seem to believe that their opinion is somehow more worthy of the town’s attention than that of “regular” citizens … that somehow their opinion “trumps,” or is superior to, any of the evidence. They also seem to suggest that because they know Crone – because he attends their Rotary meetings and their church – that somehow he is less likely to be guilty.

That is the kind of “good ol’ boy” network that will no longer be tolerated here. Highly qualified and top-notch town employees have been fired for much less. But apparently those employees weren’t in Rotary or didn’t go to the “right” churches and therefore weren’t deserving of “ethical treatment.”

Perhaps the “Citizens for Ethical Treatment of Others” should consider changing its name to “Citizens for Preferential Treatment of Some.”

(While I welcome and encourage open dialogue about the issues brought to light in this letter, I urge anyone who plans to post a comment to be civil and not make unsubstantiated allegations against the people who signed the letter of support for Crone or against those who are able to civilly criticize the letter and its endorsers. If any unsubstantiated allegations are made, I will promptly remove them.)