Citizens group wants to recall county sheriff

A group of Eureka-area residents has launched a campaign to recall Lincoln County Sheriff Daryl R. Anderson over a perceived failure to properly investigate a series of recent rape complaints.

The group is accusing the county’s top law enforcement officer of violating the public trust, failing to preserve victims’ rights, and official misconduct.

“He’s voluntarily chosen not to do his job,” Lincoln County Recall Committee spokeswoman Diane J. Kaechele said.

But Anderson, who is serving his third term as sheriff, said allegations that his department isn’t fully investigating the rape complaints are “not true.”

A small group of people, many of whom have political agendas of their own, are behind this recall petition and similar efforts in the past, Anderson maintained.

Lincoln County Recall Committee Chairwoman Ginny Emerson said there are about 45 to 50 people involved in the recall effort.

“I just think we need some answers,” Emerson said. “There’s no grudge or anything. It’s a constitutional process.”

Anderson has the continued support of county officials, including Lincoln County Commissioner Marianne Roose.

“When the sheriff’s office gets a lead, they check it out,” Roose said. “There’s been a lot of sensationalism and rumor about recent people and events. The sheriff’s office has been working diligently with some of us community leaders on the recent allegations of sexual assault.”

According to Cookie Haidle, a victim’s advocate for Lincoln County Crisis Solutions, nine Eureka-area women have approached her since May 2008 alleging rape. A 10th woman was raped in early 2007, she said.

Five of the women Haidle is in contact with reported their alleged rape to law enforcement – either the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office or Eureka Police Department. A sixth made a statement but later withdrew it. Four will not allow her to contact authorities.

And Haidle, who is not associated with the recall petition, believes three of the alleged rapes were committed by the same group of people. Alcohol and date-rape drugs appear to be common elements.

“I feel the judgment was made that either they didn’t believe a sexual assault happened … or they didn’t think there was enough evidence to continue an investigation,” Haidle said. “It’s kind of like they’re brushed off. Excuses have been made.”

The most recent rape allegedly occurred on Jan. 12, Haidle said. A woman on a four-day methamphetamine bender was tied to a bed and possibly drugged. The woman refused a rape test because of other sexual activity, but did give a blood sample, Haidle said.

“I fully want to cooperate with the sheriff’s office and do anything we can to put an end to this, and I think the only way we can do that is to all work together,” Haidle said. “I think everyone is trying to do the best job they can to get to the bottom of it.”

The Lincoln County Recall Committee alleges that authorities aren’t taking the rape cases seriously and have botched at least one investigation by waiting several days to collect evidence.

“Anderson knows how to do the investigation properly, but for whatever reason has chosen not to,” Kaechele said.

But Lincoln County Sheriff’s Detective Jim Sweet – who recalls working only one rape case, in March 2008 – said he couldn’t give the recall committee’s statistics any credibility. Ultimately the alleged victim in his case refused to cooperate, he said.

“I for one minute do not believe every single one of these women is complaining that their case hasn’t been investigated,” Sweet said. “Everything that I’m familiar with that has come into the sheriff’s office has.”

For a complaint to be successfully prosecuted, victims need to cooperate with investigators, Sweet said.

“If the victim doesn’t want to cooperate with us … it’s totally beyond our control,” he said. “Nobody wants to step up to the plate… the only one being held to that standard is the sheriff’s office.”

Officer Brenda Cavoretto said two rapes had been reported to the Eureka Police Department since May 2008, the most recent of which allegedly occurred in January. Both reports were determined to be unfounded after statements were collected and the women were set up with victim’s services, she said.

“In both cases, they’d been to the doctor and we followed protocol,” Cavoretto said.

Cavoretto advocated educating the community about how the legal system works and how victims should approach law enforcement to maximize the chance for prosecution.

But just because the alleged rapes aren’t showing up in crime statistics doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem the Sheriff’s Office is ignoring, Kaechele said.

“He’s deceiving the public. It’s a blatant deception,” she said.

Community leaders in the Eureka area are aware of the alleged rapes, said Roose, who also believes in educating the community about their responsibilities ‘so that we can have a better understanding of the process.”

And despite the dissatisfaction voiced by the recall committee, Anderson still is backed by his department and the county.

“I know that the sheriff’s office is investigating with all the materials and resources they have,” said Roose, who has represented the Eureka area for 13 years. “The sheriff has to follow a legal procedure that protects the rights of all the public. They’re working very hard behind the scenes.”

Roose called the recall petition “ridiculous’ and an “overreaction” — an emotional response to incidents inflated by rumor.

“It’s real easy to accuse the sheriff’s office or county attorney, but you know what, if you have victims not willing to come forward or give law enforcement what they need, then their hands are tied,” Roose said.

The recall committee also has expressed its dissatisfaction with Anderson’s handling of an April 2008 case where a black Labrador was found dead in the Tobacco River near the Pigeon Bridge off Montana 37.

Kaechele believes the dog had been tied to a post, tortured, beaten, hung and tossed off the bridge. She and other Eureka residents said they are furious that investigators aren’t working harder to catch the killer.

But Sweet, who called the incident “fueled by rumor and misinformation,” said there simply wasn’t evidence to support the version of events presented by Kaechele and other outraged people.

“They turned to the sheriff’s office and said, ‘Now that we’ve said it, you prove it,’” Sweet said. “But I have to operate off facts and evidence, not misinformation. There was absolutely nothing to support the claims that they made, much less the claims they wanted me to prove.”

The case is still open, pending additional leads, Sweet said. The dog never was examined by a veterinarian to determine cause of death, and there is no evidence even to prove the dog was killed by a human rather than being struck by a car or something similar, he added.

“However that dog died it was brutal and violent,” Sweet said. “Deputies have done an excellent job following up in multiple interviews with people who supposedly were suspects. Accusations just ran wild.”

Kaechele also accuses Anderson of denying without cause a Lincoln County man’s application for a concealed weapon permit, which she considers an act of official misconduct.

Anderson, however, said he denied the permit based on the applicant’s criminal history and connection with anti-government groups.

Kaechele said she expects the recall petition, which still is being drafted, to begin circulating within the next few weeks. To force a special election with Anderson’s recall on the ballot, the petition must be signed by 15 percent of people registered to vote in Lincoln County’s last general election.

However, Anderson can mount a legal challenge to the petition, which most likely will outline the Lincoln County Recall Committee’s grievances.

Attorney Thane Johnson of the Kalispell law firm Johnson, Berg, McEvoy and Bostock has been hired to represent the Lincoln County Recall Committee in any litigation arising from the recall petition.

(Nicholas Ledden is a reporter for the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell).