Thursday, July 26, 2018

COP FIRED FOR FILING CHARGES AGAINST MAYOR, CHIEF AND FORMER CHIEF

by Bob Walsh

Charles Mick used to be a Sergeant with the New Holland, Ohio, police department. He is now unemployed. Last Friday he filed criminal charges against the city Mayor, the former Chief of Police and the current interim Chief. On Monday night he was sacked.

He served Mayor Butch Betzko with a court summons at a special meeting of the village council. When he left the meeting he served interim Police Chief David Conrad in the chief's office. Mick was fired on the spot.

The town has a population of about 800 people. The police department is made up entirely of part-time volunteers. Mick announced in front of a crowd on his way out that he had just been fired for "doing the right thing." He stated he intends to file for whistle-blower protection.

Mick filed a fifth-degree felony forgery charge against Conrad, who is also the P8ickaway County emergency management director. He also filed a charge of complicity to commit forgery against Betzko, formerly a long-time deputy with the Franklin County S.O. That is also a fifth-degree felony.

Conrado is suspected of forging the signature of former Police Chief William Lawless on a document dated July 16. This was required by law to change Lawless' status in the village from Chief to Reserve Officer. It is believed that Lawless was not even in the state at the time his alleged signature was placed on the document.

Lawless has since resigned and stated he is moving out of the state. Neither Conrad nor Betzko could be reached for comment.

There are also allegedly other forged documents floating around. In addition thee is an accusation that Lawless had a local woman make harassing phone calls to a local online news site that deals with local news and issues from his office phone. Other charges may be pending in this matter.

God, don't you just love small town politics??

1 comment:

Trey Rusk said...

These types of he said, he did it. I'm telling usually wind up costing the taxpayers not the litigants. They usually don't have the money and a judgement isn't worth the paper it's written on.