Intended Consequence

This post is a bit lengthy, but stick with it. It may change your way of thinking slightly.

A number of people have cited our recent “Threats” posts as examples of the “Streisand effect” named for Barbra’s attempts to sue a California government agency for pictures documenting ocean coastal erosion which incidentally showed her mansion. Her efforts to ban the photos resulted in millions of people wanting to see the pictures instead of just a few dozen government bureaucrats. People want to see what is forbidden to them, especially if the government or so-called “elites” want it: Hunter’s laptop, Epstein’s client list, celebrity sex tapes, etc.

Think of it as the “Law of Unintended Consequences.” We have taken great amusement in pointing it out over the years. In fact, we benefited from one of the greatest missteps in CPD history when Phil Cline banned us from department computers. The aim was to wound/kill the tiny trickle of leaks that were embarrassing to the political/exempt structure. The result was readership jumping from a few hundred per day to over ten thousand overnight, and from there, thirty thousand daily until a scandal broke.....and then it was fifty thousand. Every day. Oops.

Now we had a troll - Jennifer Koniarski - threaten us with (A) exposure of our identities and (B) a lawyer if we didn’t remove a publicly accessible document issued by the Illinois Appellate Court and available on dozens of legal research sites. As a purely UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE and with ZERO EFFORT on our part, her name and lawsuit are now linked as the #1 search of three major search engines.

That wasn’t us. But this is.

We constantly (and rightly) belittle the media. We bemoan the fact that there are no investigative reporters at the major outlets any more. They manufacture scandals and do zero follow-up based on the outrage of the day. Over most of two decades, we have posted all sorts of breadcrumbs attempting to lead investigative reporters to actual scandal. The hints are still in the archives.

Here’s another one, directly related to the Law of Unintended Consequences and tying in with not only the “Threats” posts, but also the Pension Board slow-walking Duty Disability benefits to Officers wounded in the Line of Duty.

Go read that PUBLICLY AVAILABLE OPEN-SOURCED finding by the Illinois Appellate Court:

• Pay attention to Page 2, Paragraph 7 - a determination of disability;
• Now, Page 4, Paragraph 13 - a brace and cane prescribed;
• Pages 5 and 6, Paragraphs 18-22 involve the Medical Integrity Unit videotaping Koniarski lifting things and walking without a cane or brace in contradiction of medical recommendations;
• Pages 6 and 7, Paragraphs 23-27 - the doctors amended their diagnoses to counter the videotapes. After Koniarski was filmed carrying a 37-pound microwave across a short distance, one doctor suddenly specified a 40-pound restriction over 1000 feet. How convenient!
  

Amazingly, we have Officers with bullet fragments in their bodies and their heads, losing an eye, losing hearing in both ears, dying twice on the way to the hospital, who end up in a No Pay status, while Koniarski has FOUR separate doctors appearing at Pension Board hearings to amend diagnoses after she was videotaped on multiple occasions not following medical advice.

• Breadcrumb #1 - why are grievously wounded cops being put in no-pay status? Spare us the "It's been this way for thirty years" bullshit.
  
• Breadcrumb #2 - who are these four doctors available to a PPO who never graduated the Academy? And how many other disability cases are they handling?

Because these “unintended consequences” have real victims at both ends - wounded cops being fucked with and taxpayers being fucked.

By the way, we have still received no apology and will continue to post the open source link as we feel like it. Welcome to internet immortality dumbass.