Advertisement

SB Council discusses a possible end to police tapes court fight

(WNDU)
Published: Oct. 23, 2019 at 4:05 PM EDT
Email This Link
Share on Pinterest
Share on LinkedIn

Some on the South Bend Common Council are apparently having second thoughts about heading into an eighth year of litigation over the South Bend police tapes.

The council met Wednesday night behind closed doors to further discuss the matter.

The reason to reconsider?

“The Young Turks has for the first time revealed documents that could independently establish what is on the recordings without the need to actually listen to the recordings,” Council President Tim Scott said in a written statement.

As Pete Buttigeig continues to court a future in the White House, his past is increasingly under scrutiny back home.

Much of that attention has come from a national news and current events organization called the Young Turks, or TYT.

The organization has done extensive reporting on the South Bend police tapes scandal that has apparently impressed Scott.

“The Young Turks have brought to this common council information it has had no legal way to see before,” Scott’s statement went on to read. “This common council requested an extension to understand the implications of the Young Turks’ information, thus a part of a strategy to see if that information results in achieving the goals stated by the common council seven years ago without the additional costs of possibly three more years of litigation and three more years of delay. Court trial for this case is not scheduled until the summer of 2020, at the earliest, and if the past is any indication, the case will spend two more years in the appellate courts.”

TYT reports that the tapes contain schemes regarding how to influence Buttigeig to place certain individuals in positions of power in the police department.

The tapes led to the demotion of Police Chief Darryl Boykins and the firing of the communications director.

The Buttigeig campaign is quoted as calling the TYT version of events “unsubstantiated allegations and rumors.”

Any decision on the future of the litigation would require a vote during a public meeting.