Phony SEAL chief of Waukegan, IL PD
Jeff sends us a link to the Chicago Tribune story about Robert Kerkorian, the new police chief of Waukegan, IL who put on his 1987 application to join the police force that he was, what else, a Navy SEAL;
But Chief Robert Kerkorian never trained as a SEAL, according to military records obtained by the Tribune. He was in the Navy for six months and never entered the rigorous training required of the special operations force, records show.
Asked about his military career, Kerkorian repeatedly declined to discuss the issue.
“Anything that preceded my employment here as a police officer has no bearing on my 26 years as a law enforcement officer here,” he said.
Well, other than the fact that you’re big F’n liar, nuts which are numb. Don Shipley busted him, of course;
By adding SEAL training to his application, the new chief essentially credited himself with undertaking “the toughest military training in the world,” said Don Shipley, a former SEAL who exposes military fakers online. People who misstate their service on applications, Shipley said, mislead employers and disrespect veterans’ sacrifices.
“When you’re putting that crap on a job resume, you’re definitely trying to profit from it,” he said.
Apparently, the mayor doesn’t think it’s a big deal.
Questioned about his new chief’s military record, Motley said he had not looked at Kerkorian’s personnel file and the two had never discussed his service. His military credentials are “not relevant to his employment as chief,” Motley said, describing himself as “very pro-Kerkorian.”
“I think he’s doing an excellent job. He’s very well-respected,” he said.
Yeah, but can you believe anything that comes out of his crooked mouth?
Category: Phony soldiers
@47
So there is different degrees of lying? Some are ok and some or not? Some should be overlooked and some should not?
This isn’t some kid that lied to get a job at Dairy Queen for the summer. This is a Police Officer, with life and death authority, and now a Police Chief with the safety of a community in his hands.
Know what we do with kids in the military that get caught lying on their enlistment paperwork after they are in? They can be Court Martialed and get some prison time. Rarely does this happen. But what does happen reguarly is that we process them for an admin seperation ith an OTH (Other Than Honorable) discharge with a bill to the tune of $40K to repay the cost of training them.
Most reasonable people would see that as appropriate and necessary. But somehow you can overlook the same thing with this guy?
LOL @ Hondo (50)
Excellent man, excellent. *GRIN*
The lack of integrity in this country astounds me, as does the lack of holding people accountable. Everyone gets a pass now.
Ya hafta figure that it had to be something more than an obscure employment application from over twenty years ago that led to this discovery. He must’ve said something about it recently to someone. I’m pretty sure Shipley isn’t trolling the employment applications in an obscure police department just looking for these things.
@51 – To be politically correct here, there is no such thing as “lying” anymore. It is referred to as “mis-speaking”,”not entirely accurate” or “misleading”.
What are the chances that IF a relative of Mr. Butt Buddy, the mayor, is arrested by a P/O in Waukegan for anything short of murder, the officer’s supervisor calls the chief and that’s the end of it?
A. 100%
B. 100%
C. 100%
D. 100%
@44 I was mature adult at the age of 25, not sure why you were still doing dumb shit. Also not sure why that makes it okay for someone to lie in order to get a job as a civil employee.
@51: Yes, absolutely, there are different degrees to lying – lying about killing countless people is less important than, say, lying about cheating on a test in 4th grade, just to pick an example. In this example, neither is ‘right’, but both vary in their degree of being wrong. And sure, sometimes it’s even ‘right’ to lie – I can give you examples if you like.
Getting back to the main point, though, to rephrase what you quoted me saying earlier, for me it comes down to who he’s been during the past 25 years, *weighed against* what he did back then. And, in the grand scheme of things, to me a lie like this -if it hasn’t become a way of life for him- doesn’t speak more to his character than a distinguished career that’s apparently well received.
Again, if any of those things are shown false – he lies constantly, his career is actually horrible, etc., etc. – I’ll change my tune.
So, once again, since people lying on their enlistment paperwork get prison time, should Audie Murphy (and countless others who lied to get in) all be retroactively shamed and their honors stripped from them because, service be damned, they lied with respect to their enlistment? Or do we weigh these things with what their intent was, what their actions say about their character, and come to a conclusion based on the whole of the situation rather than getting stopped simply by the mention of a lie?
@54: If that’s the case, like I said, I’ll change my tune. I just figured it was because this was a new appointment, someone decided to do a biographical article on him, got his old application and thought, “Wow, I never knew..” and looked into it. Or someone else who was up for chief knew about it from the time they were both new recruits and is angling for the job.
It’s possible he brought it up again, too, though, in which case he’s screwed. Until we see evidence of that, though, what we have to go on is a 25-year old claim not even of SEAL status, but rather ‘SEAL trainee’, whatever that means, versus what seems to be an honorable career. I’m sure with all the attention this is getting, we’ll know more soon.
Two prime examples of what can happen when anyone/someone in law enforcement lies. Take a look at the Washington State Patrol’s Crime Lab & US Army CID Crime Lab.
Take a wild guess how many cases can potentionaly be overturned now because somebody told a lie, be it on an application or while handling and/or processing evidence.
Now that is out, what would you think will happen if any case he investigated is hauled back to court for review…..because he lied on his application?
Hand the boy a smoking hot bag of dicks, he’s done.
AND I am willing to bet, the State of Illinois will be yanking his POST cert’s too. So long, adios muchacos, nice knowing ya, goodbye big city cop, hello Marion State Penitentary.
@58, Audie Murphy is not a relevant parallel. He was a soldier that was employed to engage the enemy, and he was good at it. He lied about his age, but his career is not founded in absolute infallibility like a police officers career is.
The guy is a police chief. Police officers careers are founded in credibility and integrity. Once they are a proven liar, they are no longer a credible witness. Whether we like him or not is irrelevant. Whether we care about his integrity is irrelevant too. Once his honesty, even from way back when, is challenged, the prosecution will have a nearly impossible task to secure a conviction. It’s that simple.
You are comparing apples to oranges.
@58. 2Wait a second. You take someone to task for invoking concentration camp guards and the passage of time and then you roll out Audie Murphy? That’s pretty funny. But more to the point, that lying business does not apply to all equally. And, yes, a self serving motive for lying is regarded differently from a selfless motive for lying. Sometimes the lie is insconsequential. Here it is not, notwithstanding the passage of time. What he did in the ensuing years is called mitigation. It does not erase the original bad act. It’s rather like the prison escapee who is found and recapatured after so many years of living a crime-free life. He may be set free sooner than later but there is a price to be paid first. (Um. “No comment.” I just love that part.)
@ #58: So what proof do you have that he has led an exemplary life since that one BIG single lie on the job application? The article indicates that other officers were aware of his lie about being a SEAL. Because he said so. Are they all lying?
Some of us really do not believe that lying is every justifiable. We were just raised that way. Lying about military service is right up there on the top of the pile of BIG lies.
You are free to excuse this behavior. I will not. Liars in positions of public trust are simply not acceptable no matter the lie or the liar.
@63: I couldn’t think of a closer example off the top of my head — I’m well aware of the differences between Murphy’s situation and this one, but in that specific reply was talking solely about how O-4E made no distinction between ANY kinds of lying. Still, you and 62 are correct, it’s a bad example. Alas, try googling for people who lied and military and all you get are SVA sorts!
As I said above, I’m not excusing the guy’s lie, it certainly holds weight, but as you indicate, I’m viewing the (seemingly) 25 year career as mitigating and, ultimately, more indicative of his character than something done (seemingly) once, long ago. And yeah, the ‘no comment’ bit is foolish.
@62: You’re correct, as I just mentioned to 63 – it’s a clearly bad example, but was still the best I had at the time.
As for the prosecution, I’m actually not so sure that’s how it’ll play out – if indeed this was a one-time thing, and this is a fairly small community, any prosecutor playing that card runs just a high risk of losing jury members for such tactics. If this is an on-going lie? Absolutely. He’s screwed, and all cases he’s been involved in are tarnished.
@66, the prosecutor wouldn’t play any card. It’s the defense attorney that would discredit him on the stand. I’ve seen it done. It’s effective and permanent.
@66. I’ll give you credit for your stance but, more importantly, for your apparent willingness to reconsider the matter, as it were. You didn’t comment and run like some sissies do. I think you are a reasonable fellow.
@64: None, but what proof do we have that he didn’t? Innocent until proven guilty and all. And yes, he can be ‘guilty’ for that lie, yet still ‘innocent’ when it comes to his career.
And here’s what the article says about the other officers being aware of the lie:
“Multiple former Waukegan police officers reported hearing that Kerkorian had trained as a Navy SEAL. One former city officer said Kerkorian told him early in his career that he had been through specialized SEAL training before leaving the Navy.”
What is important here -and I don’t have any info one way or another- is the ‘early in his career’ bit. If this was right around the time he signed up, and again we’re talking stupidity from years in the past, I feel that’s mitigated by his career. Others can and clearly do feel differently, but if he has the confidence of his officers and his community, I’m not going to cast stones from the internet.
I also don’t find lying for personal gain to be justifiable (I make exceptions when a greater good is at stake), and no doubt, lying about military service is a bad thing. Serving (seemingly admirable) as a copy for 25+ years is a good thing. People differ on how to weigh those two things – I just happen to put the good as more noteworthy than the bad. It’s not excusing it, the lie is bad, absolutely, but I don’t think it should warrant this amount of scorn or the guy’s job. There are plenty of more worthy causes of outrage out there than this.
@67: I’m replying too fast; I meant how the defense would use it to discredit it. However, you and I disagree on how that would work out. We all tend to think jury members would think like we do, so while you think it would discredit him, I think it would make the defense look weak bringing up something like this.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on that matter until we see if any court cases actually do involve this guy and the matter comes up.
Anonymous: It’s pretty obvious that O-4E was merely taking your argument to a logical extreme in the hope that you would recognize the fallacy of your position.
Your argument is, in essence, the following:
1. The individual committed a serious offense in the past (falsifying an official government document along with presumably certifying under penalty of false swearing that all entries are true and correct – most public service job applications include such a statement).
2. That offense is expunged or “forgiven” by the intervening 26 years of living an excellent, meaningful, productive life.
That exact argument applies equally well to the example presented by O-4E. Either both are valid, or there’s a problem in both cases.
Frankly, I’m surprised you missed that. You seem relatively intelligent.
By the way: you might want to read my comment 45 above. There, I provide a link that gives me a very different reason to question just how many “corners” this guy may have cut during his police career – and how many rules and/or laws he may have broken (or overlooked others breaking) along the way.
His false claims to be a SEAL may not be relevant but I’d imagine a history of suspect judgment calls that include a resignation by him might be relevent Mr. Mayor
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-11-15/news/0411150221_1_officers-cocaine-and-crack-cocaine-police-station
Anonymous: here are at least 3 cases where Kerkorian comes up. I’m guessing he testified in these, plus a lot more, over the years.
http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/appellatecourt/1997/2nddistrict/march/html/2950476.txt
http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/appellatecourt/2003/2nddistrict/june/html/2000498.htm
http://www.state.il.us/court/OPINIONS/AppellateCourt/2010/2ndDistrict/January/2071276.pdf
Anonymous, I get it. I can understand why you would personally or give him. So would I. But our opinions will not assist a prosecutor make a case. It’s too easy for a defense attorney to discredit him on the stand. That’s what matters
jabatam: yer late, amigo. See comment 45 above. (smile)
@39, Gravel, when I joined my department, I was required to provide a copy of my 214 if I was claiming to be a Veteran. And, back then, the guy doing background checks was a Vet. He knew how to read a 214 and what to look for.
I have to go with Jonn in 54, this had to have come up recently. I can’t picture a reporter thinking, “self, let’s go look up the original employment applications of all the Police Chiefs in the state of Illinois”.
And, I wonder how many lawers(I know) are going back over their files where the Chief testified as a patrol officer or investigator, and how many cons are sitting in Joliet, thinking, “that sum’bitch lied about me at trial”.
@Hondo: A logical extreme is all well and good, but if we’re labeling ‘genocidal murder of hundreds or thousands’ and ‘lied on a resume about experience he didn’t have’ as equal in terms of ‘serious offensives’, then I think we’ve gone off the deep end.
I’m not putting forth the idea that twenty five years of X *expunges* Y from your past, regardless of what Y is, I’m simply saying we weigh things accordingly. That’s a fuzzy calculation and I completely understand if people draw different conclusions than I do based on their own valuations of his career and his lie. I’m arguing my point of view, much like others are arguing theirs — that’s all we can do, right?
And I have read the links in your previous comments, but again, I’ll wait and see what else comes out. The drugs were in the desks of officers he supervised, not his own, and even though that is certainly under the umbrella of his responsibility, I will await more information. I know too many cops and detectives who are very good people who sometimes cut corners. Either I’m horrible unlucky in knowing such people, or it’s par for the course and is generally just not made public. You can guess which I think is the more likely scenario there.
Ultimately, what it comes down to isn’t that I’m excusing this guy for any and all offenses, I’m simply saying that at this point, with what’s available to go on, I’ll give him some benefit of the doubt. This story is clearly getting some attention, so I’m sure we’ll know a lot more about him and these lies in the coming days and then we’ll be able to judge things more accurately.
@76
I’m also wondering how the back ground investigation missed this one
I had a Captain that worked for me that got out a little over a year ago now and was hired by a PD a little bigger than Waukegan.
He said that investigation made the TS clearance investigation seem like child’s play. His investigator was in our office pouring over his personnel file with our S-1 to verify his record and interviewed our Commander, me and the NCOs that worked for him.
@78, I’m wondering too. My neighbors, my in-laws and everyone else that I ever knew, including my last C.O. and Platoon Leader let me know that the PD was investigating me.
Let’s say, for argument’s sake…that there are a couple of real SEALs that work in the same police department under this chief. What if they get reprimanded or not promoted by this chief. Moral or morale issue(s) abound?
What standards are being promoted in this department?
Integrity, honor and validity is being called into this promotion’s equation, and this “chief” is a failure on all three counts.
Time does tell!
Anonymous: the guy did a bit more than “lie on his resume”. He filled out an application – and official document – and submitted it. That application contained false information. He also certified it as being correct. That means he knowingly lied on an official document in connection with gaining public employment. Kinda sounds like fraud to me.
Here’s the current Waukegan Police Academy application. I’m guessing that the one in 1987 was something similar. Take a look at the info above the signature on page 2.
http://waukeganweb.net/CitizenPoliceAcademyApplication.pdf
No one is seriously equating concentration camp duty with luying. Just as you would not let off someone like Demjanjuk after an otherwise blameless life and would want him tried appropriately, a n appropriately mitigated punishment in this case would be something like “immediate resignation” rather than jail time for falsifying official documents.
UpNorth: the “my records are classified” canard, perhaps? (smile)
David: I’m reasonably certain that the max statue of limitations for such crimes is 5 or 7 years. He was first hired in 1987.
I would, however, be interested in knowing if he had to fill out similar paperwork each time he was promoted – and what he put on those documents. If so, at least one of those documents should be dated within the last year, since he was apparently just appointed Chief earlier this year.
@81 Hondo
Best I could find was that the statute of limitations in Illinois for written contracts is 10 years, HOWEVER, since this is a little *more* than just your average written contract, perjury and falsifying an official government document may have other considerations.
@70, it’s a critical part of the judicial process. If not the most fundamental. I don’t know what your experience is, but if the defense strategy was to discredit him, and they would be successful, no prosecutor in his right mind would let a jury hear the case. Any case he made would be nolle prossed.
The implications for the department are bad too. If they allow dishonesty at his level, it would call into question the integrity of every case that relied on officer testimony. That’s all cases.
Shane Ladner is a good example. No matter how honest he was in testimony, all of his cases are subject to appeal because he is a proven liar.
“The higher you, go the higher the standards?”
The personnel regs are unaffected by a statute of limitations. If he lied on his app, then he could have been canned BUT now that he is an appointee, he’s most likely free and clear of that. Besides, someone would actually have to initiate the action and, from the newspaper article, I’d say that there’s a better chance of the Cubs winning the World Series this season than that happening.
OK, for everyone who has said “It happened so long ago”.
When I applied for the local PD you have to fill out a background check. ANY lies on it automatically boots you from the selection process and I am sure the PD he works for is the same way.
Even if it is found out years from when you were hired you can be booted for it since the information you provided was fraudulent. For that reason alone he should be fired.
David: Demjanjuk might not be the best example to use. There’s substantial evidence that he was railroaded, at least in his 1988 trial in Israel (the Israeli Supreme Court said as much when they overturned his conviction in 1993). The US Government also apparently suppressed evidence pertinent to both is deportation and trial in Israel. And his later conviction in Germany was both highly suspect (little evidence of any type, few living witnesses – one of whom flatly stated Demjanjuk was not who the German prosecutors claimed he was – and the only hard documentary evidence linking Demjanjuk to concentration camps was thought by many to be a likely KGB forgery) and was also never finalized (Demjanjuk died while awaiting appeal).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Demjanjuk
Not saying Demjanjuk was or wasn’t guilty – I don’t know. But his case isn’t a good one to use as an example. Feodor Fedorenko is probably a better example, as he admitted in sworn testimony to having been a guard at Treblinka.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feodor_Fedorenko
@76 UpNorth
Please be advised I’m not defending him in any way, shape, or form. Merely pointing out that once he’s the chief (and no longer a regular member of the department) he’s probably not subject to that “sworn” letter anymore. He’s probably under a specific hiring contract and he serves at the leisure of the Mayor.
Frankly I’m amazed someone didn’t catch this sooner while he was a cop, or in his application process to become chief.
ChipNASA: this page gives at least a partial list:
http://research.lawyers.com/Illinois/Illinois-Statutes-of-Limitations.html
For criminal actions, the longest seem to be about 3 years. The list is not all-inclusive, but Burglary and Kidnapping are both 3 years, so I’d doubt false swearing is any longer than that.
Things are different in IL for civil matters, some of which seem to have longer statutes of limitations. Contract and enforcing a court judgement have longer statues of limitations than 3 years (10 and 20 years, respectively), as do a few others (civil fraud, property damage, oral contract, 5 years; legal mapractice, 6 years). But those are for civil matters and not for crimes that can put anyone in jail.
@ #76: That’s the thing about integrity. It applies all the time.
That his claimed military record would not be confirmed when he was originally hired is suspect with me. Or maybe it was. Or he was still given credit for that 6 mon service.
Many departments and agencies give bonus points for military service. A DD-214 must be supplied with the application. That might be good enough to continue the process, but it should still be confirmed prior to actual hire.
If something like this came up now, for no apparent reason, then someone somewhere in the appellate court or some other part of the judicial system said something about it.
Otherwise, it’s 27 years in the past and he’s now the chief of police in Waukegan, not a cop in a squadroll.
So now you need to ask, why bring it up now? What is there that would spur someone to dig into this past history like this? Well, if you look at the history of James Burge, who was a CPD cop and a former CPD police commander, many of his torture victims have been exonerated and he is now sitting in jail AND being sued.
Here’s the latest link on Burge: http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/05/31/58090.htm
Somebody somewhere said something about Kerkorian’s past. Otherwise, there was no reason to even bring it up this late in his “career”.
@94 no doubt there’s more to follow….
@91. I know you weren’t defending him. I’m amazed too, that this wasn’t caught. Then again, maybe whoever did his background check didn’t know his/her ass from his/her elbow, and didn’t realize that 6 months is an awfully short hitch?
@83. {Headslap} Of course, why didn’t all of us consider that?
@93. What I said in reply to #91.
Was researching the Waukegan Police Department and was amazed to discover that there have been 3 officer suicides in the past few months, one officer discovered dead in the woods and all sorts of strange things. There are only 144 officers on the force.
What I was originally trying to determine was what sort of retirement this new chief might be drawing from his time on the civil service side of the house, but got rather distracted. One interesting bit of trivia is that there seems to be no link to the WPD from the official city site. Hmmm.
There do seem to be a myriad of problems there. Might kind of explain the mayor being more than a little touchy about the new chief, who he hired to replace the last one that resigned under a rather grey cloud.
This just gets more and more strange!
UpNorth: Hah! Got interrupted prior to posting, so there ya go!!
$55K to $84,753 a year, for a patrolman? Holy batcrap, Batman. I retired from LE way too soon.
Hit the wrong button, yet again. With paid holidays and OT, a patrolman could gross close to $100K/year.