JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC

I’ve got two concerns about the selection of a new Kansas City police chief. One is general, the other specific.

First, the general…

Under the system we’ve got — been stuck with since the Pendergast days — our police chiefs are selected by a five-member (four members right now) board appointed by the governor.

The days when local officials couldn’t be trusted to oversee the police department are long past; we badly need local control of the department. And the mayor, who is a member of the board, should be making the selection.

Several years ago, St. Louis City, the only other Missouri city whose police department was governed from Jefferson City, won its freedom. In a deal that involved St. Louis area resident and political activist and contributor Rex Sinquefield, the Missouri General Assembly approved a bill that gave St. Louis voters a chance to approve local control. After a campaign largely financed by Sinquefield, that’s exactly what St. Louis voters did. Now, their mayor appoints their police chief, and the city runs the department top to bottom.

We need the same thing, even if it means making some sort of deal with Sinquefield, who also has agitated, unsuccessfully, for elimination of the city earnings tax. The e-tax is off limits; it’s the biggest single generator of general-fund revenue. I don’t know exactly what the deal was with St. Louis, but it was a huge step forward to get the police department out from under state control. So, Sly, put in a call to Rex and see if you can’t get something going…It’s ridiculous we don’t have local control in KC.

Second, the specific…

As you probably know, the next chief will either be Maj. Rick Smith, the internal finalist, or Norman, OK, Police Chief Keith Humphrey.

My concern stems from Smith’s involvement several years ago in the case of Shawn Ratigan, the Catholic priest who is serving a 50-year prison sentence for producing or attempting to produce child pornography. Specifically, he took “up skirt” photos of young girls attending the Northland grade school operated by the parish where he was then assigned.

Smith’s role in the case has not received much media attention, so here’s the context…

Smith and Humphrey, police chief finalists

Smith was a member of a diocesan review board (Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph) that assesses sexual abuse allegations. Then-Bishop Robert Finn and then-Vicar General Robert Murphy knew about the photos but did not initially bring them to the attention of the review board…or the police. A subsequent report revealed, however, that Murphy phoned Smith and told him about a photo of a nude girl found on a priest’s computer.

Murphy himself had not seen the photo, and he described to Smith what he understood the photo to show. Based on Murphy’s description, Smith said it might meet the definition of child pornography but probably did not.

And that was as far as it went, up to that point. Apparently Smith did not contact any other review board members, and he apparently did not ask to see the photo.

Much later, Smith told investigators he was shocked to learn there were hundreds of photos.

…Finn, of course, was ultimately convicted of a misdemeanor count of failing to report child sex abuse, but it took a long time for the full story to come out and for the legal process to run its course.

It seems to me that Smith’s police antennae failed him when he did not press to see the photo. I would think hearing from the vicar general — the No. 2 diocesan official — that a photo of a nude girl had been found on a priest’s computer would set off alarms in an experienced police officer’s head.

Maybe an alarm did sound, but I suspect what happened is that the heavy cloak cast by a big Catholic diocese muffled the sound, and Smith decided to let it go.

Smith wasn’t the only non-clerical official to drop the ball. Diocesan officials also told their attorney, Jonathan Haden, about the photos. Laughably, Haden told diocesan officials that in his legal opinion a picture that did not show sexual conduct, contact, performance or sexually explicit conduct did not constitute pornography.

I guess Haden hasn’t ever looked at porn…Either that, or he, too, was feeling the weight of that Catholic cloak.

So, should Smith’s handling of the question put to him by the vicar general disqualify him from becoming police chief? I’m not sure it should, but if I was on that police board, I’d have a hard time voting for him.