Ex-governor Snyder to be charged in Flint water crisis

[Cincinnati_Kid]

As someone who lived in Flint during the water crisis and who lost significant value on my home when I sold it, I say it is about friggen time. My job puts me in contact with people affected by the water crisis everyday, I sat across the table from Rick Snyder and Nick Lyons as they denied any culpability. My biggest regret was not slapping away their hands when the reached out to shake mine. [[I guess that kept me employed, lol)

Damn shame he continued to live his privileged life, 7 years after that fiasco that he knew about and denied vehemently....

[Cincinnati_Kid]

What are the odds of someone convicted of any 1st offence misdemeanor charge, let alone a former governor, actually going to jail?

He's not going to jail. He might get off paying a fine, and you'll never hear anything else about it. Yet all those people lost life and have health issues because of his negligence.

[313WX]

He's not going to jail. He might get off paying a fine, and you'll never hear anything else about it. Yet all those people lost life and have health issues because of his negligence.

He doesn't have to go to jail.

I'll just be happy if he's convicted, for posterity.

[Jimaz]

He's not going to jail. He might get off paying a fine, and you'll never hear anything else about it. Yet all those people lost life and have health issues because of his negligence.

From Maof's link:

Richard Snyder – Former Governor of Michigan
Two counts of willful neglect of duty – each a one-year misdemeanor and/or $1,000 fine

Seems too light considering what damage there was.

[softailrider]

They’re charging him with two misdemeanors? That’s all they have? You got to be kidding.

[JonWylie]

They’re charging him with two misdemeanors? That’s all they have? You got to be kidding.

With how much delegation comes inherent in a position like that, it's hard to connect people directly to stuff.

[Danny]

What have you done, Snyder you nerd? What kind of a leader are you?

[Wesley Mouch]

Contrarian point of view...

Snyder made a mistake. He was trying to do something good for the abused citizenry of Flint by improving water. He underestimated the problem. He made a mistake, but in good faith.

If he was malicious, then by all means work for justice.

But this smells like political theatre to me. Get the bad Republican. Impeach him, I mean Snyder.

I'm sure the party faithful enjoy watching someone from the other tribe squirm. But all it does is ensure that rather decent candidates decide not to try and run for office -- and if they do, discourages them from trying to do anything to help a mess like Flint -- because it'll be nothing but pain and trouble for you.

Bad way to solve Flint's problems, seems to me. Flint needs help. Don't make it painful to try to help.

[JonWylie]

Contrarian point of view...

Snyder made a mistake. He was trying to do something good for the abused citizenry of Flint by improving water. He underestimated the problem. He made a mistake, but in good faith.

If he was malicious, then by all means work for justice.

But this smells like political theatre to me. Get the bad Republican. Impeach him, I mean Snyder.

I'm sure the party faithful enjoy watching someone from the other tribe squirm. But all it does is ensure that rather decent candidates decide not to try and run for office -- and if they do, discourages them from trying to do anything to help a mess like Flint -- because it'll be nothing but pain and trouble for you.

Bad way to solve Flint's problems, seems to me. Flint needs help. Don't make it painful to try to help.

I feel like once you get a grand jury to indict, you've passed the point of political theater because you've actually had to present evidence to lay people.

[Scottathew]

Contrarian point of view...

Snyder made a mistake. He was trying to do something good for the abused citizenry of Flint by improving water. He underestimated the problem. He made a mistake, but in good faith.

The State takeover wasn't trying to improve the water, it was trying to improve the budget. While I can certainly appreciate that, let's not try to pretend that the action was being take to improve their water quality. The state's concern with Flint during the takeover had nothing to do about quality of life and everything to do with budget. I'm not necessarily against the state taking over failing municipalities, but when the state is at the helm and they make a terrible, costly decision, the state bears the responsibility.

Good faith ends when the state government officials knew of a very dangerous problem and underacted and underreported the issue.

It will be interesting to see how direct the connection is between Snyder and the state officials that knew what was going on.

[313WX]

If he was malicious, then by all means work for justice.

What does this even mean?

If you're responsible for causing a car accident and someone is killed, you could still be charged and convicted with a crime whether the homicide was malicious or not.

[birwood]

I think AG's office is on the right track but she seem to be using a small minnow dip net instead of casting a broad seine net. She also needs to look at, regardless of political affiliation, everyone involved.

1. Who planted the seed to change to Flint River Water?

2. Who lobbied the Flint city powers, the State or Local Government official to enact the change?

3. Who made the final decision to go with the Flint River water? The State of Local Elected Officials?

4. Who from the EPA, MDEQ, County Health originally told Flint officials the change from Detroit Water would not hurt anyone?

5. Why did they want to leave the Detroit Water and go with the new [[KWA) Karegnondi Water Authority if it wan't ready to provide safe water service? What was the rush?

6. Were there any water treatment safeguards stipulated in the change know the status of the Flint River and were they ignored? By who's decision and why?

7. Why wasn't/isn't GM being a major pollution contributor to the Flint River also held accountable for some of the problems.

I think the AG's office needs to cast a broader net, not just Snyder

[313WX]

I think AG's office is on the right track but she seem to be using a small minnow dip net instead of casting a broad seine net. She also needs to look at, regardless of political affiliation, everyone involved.

1. Who planted the seed to change to Flint River Water?

2. Who lobbied the Flint city powers, the State or Local Government official to enact the change?

3. Who made the final decision to go with the Flint River water? The State of Local Elected Officials?

4. Who from the EPA, MDEQ, County Health originally told Flint officials the change from Detroit Water would not hurt anyone?

5. Why did they want to leave the Detroit Water and go with the new [[KWA) Karegnondi Water Authority if it wan't ready to provide safe water service? What was the rush?

6. Were there any water treatment safeguards stipulated in the change know the status of the Flint River and were they ignored? By who's decision and why?

7. Why wasn't/isn't GM being a major pollution contributor to the Flint River also held accountable for some of the problems.

I think the AG's office needs to cast a broader net, not just Snyder

I would think casting a wider net is the exaxt opposite of what any lawyer would want to do.

It's a lot easier for the opposing party to find holes in a lawyer's arguments if they have such a broad focus.

That's probably why Snyder is only being charged with neglect, because it's the easiest to prove.

[Wesley Mouch]

What does this even mean?

If you're responsible for causing a car accident and someone is killed, you could still be charged and convicted with a crime whether the homicide was malicious or not.

Motivation matters in criminal acts. Accidental deaths are manslaughter. Intentional deaths are murder.

Killing someone who jumps out in front of you from the sidewalk probably won't even be a crime. Beheading is murder.

Two things to consider:

1) Motivation
2) Public Policy

Motivation is important as discussed. Determines if there's a valid reason to sue -- or whether this is political gamesmanship.

Public Policy is important because it determines who agents of the State behave. If we sue everyone where the outcome is terrible, then we discourage action. This is the 'Ferguson Effect' that we're seeing in near doubling of murder rates in big cities IMO. Tell cops you have a great risk of losing your job, income, and future career prospects if you arrest a criminal -- then cops eat more donuts. And society decays as we are most clearly seeing.

[Jimaz]

The legacy of the Flint water crisis [[Jan 12 2021)

Six years ago, lead seeped into the tap water in Flint, Michigan, while state and local officials said everything was fine. Now, the same doctor who proved something was wrong is taking the first comprehensive look at the thousands of kids exposed to lead in Flint. Sharyn Alfonsi reports.

[Wheels]

It’s a shame Michigan will go on record for having two governors on trial at the same time!

[Richard]

I feel like once you get a grand jury to indict, you've passed the point of political theater because you've actually had to present evidence to lay people.

Ever hear the saying of “you can get a grand jury to indict a peanut butter sandwich” ? They do not show any evidence at that time,outside of what the prosecutors have before it is disputed in a trial.


Lots have been indicted by a grand jury before and had charges dropped afterwards when the DA really looks at the case.

Interesting how in Fl the penalty for driving on a suspended license is up to 5 years in prison,but yet .....

[old guy]

Ever hear the saying of “you can get a grand jury to indict a peanut butter sandwich” ?

No.

[old guy]

[QUOTE=Richard;606261, Interesting how in Fl the penalty for driving on a suspended license is up to 5 years in prison...[/QUOTE]

Not really that interesting.

[Jimaz]

Ever hear the saying of “you can get a grand jury to indict a peanut butter sandwich” ?

No.

That's actually a Googlewhack although with more than two words.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

Lock him up! Lock him up!

[Richard]

No.

Well okay,how about a ham sandwich

New York State chief judge Sol Wachtler was famously quoted by Tom Wolfe in The Bonfire of the Vanities that "a grand jury would 'indict a ham sandwich,' if that's what you wanted."^[18][19]

Wachtler's most famous quote, made shortly after his appointment as Chief Judge, was that district attorneys could get grand juries to "indict a ham sandwich."^[3]

[Meddle]

From Maof's link:

Richard Snyder – Former Governor of Michigan
Two counts of willful neglect of duty – each a one-year misdemeanor and/or $1,000 fine

Seems too light considering what damage there was.

An ethical person would plead out, pay a small fine and be done with it instead of racking up trial expenses.

[Ray1936]

An ethical person would plead out, pay a small fine and be done with it instead of racking up trial expenses.

Exactly. Much ado about nothing. [[I think someone said that in an earlier life of mine...................)

[softailrider]

An ethical person would plead out, pay a small fine and be done with it instead of racking up trial expenses.

Robert Kraft could have done the same thing, but he didn't.