I am appalled at the use of hearsay and innuendo by these people opposed to Simmons. It is clearly an orchestrated campaign to eliminate the "guy from up North" and elect another good ole boy to follow Randall Johnson. Hannah seems like a nice guy, but he is definitely not the trained professional that Simmons seems to be.
If 30 yrs (or so) of on the job training like Hannah has is good enough, then surely someone who has worked the "mean streets" is at least, and probably more qualified to run the Sheriffs deparment.

Detroit Free Press articles 12-5-1997, 8-28-1992, 5-8-1992, and the current one Tom1939 posted from Sept.2001.

Read it for yourself. Since the reporters at Detroit Free Press have become too "involved" in the current mayor scandal there, I have our local library staff doing the leg work on the articles not posted online.

Character, and the ability to carry out the oath of office is very important.

Forbes.com just named the city of Detroit "the least desirable place to live" because of violent crime that is off the charts.

My conclusion from that is that even if simmons had not been retired and out of the game for 12+yrs. He still doesn't hold a candle to our guys. We have a very low crime rate here, and whatever they are doing in Detroit isn't working and has never worked. We should actually be sending some of our deputies to Detroit to help them with their crime problem.

If you overlook crime you are part of the problem.

A U.S. District Court Judge believes that "top officials" at Detroit PD overlooked crime. Detroit Free Press 8-28-1992: Judge Paul Gadola lectured the "top officials" of Detroit PD for 90mins about their failure to blow the whistle on crime happening right under their noses. They failed to uphold the oath of office.

To top it off he has McKinnon endorsing him on his web site.

I'm sure he is surprised at how easy it was for us poor dumb hicks in Fayette County to find out all of the dirt on him.

The IRS can go back more than 10yrs and audit when they suspect criminal activity and malfeasance. Which I believe one agent suspects now. I'm glad he started bragging in this particular letter to the editor. Tipped off people who also don't think it sounds right at all.

I would rather be thrown in a cell with Charles Manson than a dirty cop. Dirty cops are the dregs of society. They are much worse than other criminals, because they take an oath to "serve and protect".

The people of Detroit were neither served or protected. That is my conclusion after reading reports dated 5-8-1992, 8-28-1992, and 12-5-1997 reported in the Detroit Freepress.

Forbs.Com named Detroit as the worst city to live in because of high crime. Why would we elect someone whos ideas about fighting crime obviously don't work, and B. are also clearly outdated since he has been retired for 12yrs.??

Just doesn't make sense at all.

...a Detroit News article about Dave Simmons' professional mentor on the Detroit police department, Ike McKinnon. The article discusses the many questions left unanswered about the promotional exam cheating scandal. Simmons, the Chief of Staff for Ike McKinnon, retired shortly before the scandal broke. These things clearly speak to Dave Simmons' character and worthiness to head the sheriffs department. Can he be trusted with the $14 million annual budget of the sheriff's department? There are too many questions and concerns about his character. As "Rbonner1960" wrote about the comments of other Detroit polcie officers that know Dave Simmons. I'm a few years older than Dave Simmons and I've been around the block more than a time or two with the Detroit police department. I was assigned to the old Detroit police department's Second Precinct "Vernor Station." Dave Simmons was there as a young police officer, as well. Some things in his behavior revealed extremely questionable character no department needs and would land an officer behind bars today. It appears those things were harbingers of things to come from Dave Simmons. We'll let those sleeping dogs lay. But, the below excerpt is from the Detroit News about Dave Simmons mentor and endorser for the office of sheriff, Ike McKinnon. A true public servant, cut from the same mold as Dave Simmons, 1984 FBI in-service trainee, reporting for duty.

+++++++++++++++++++++
Release Detroit's police exam probe
Detroit News, The (MI) - September 14, 2001
Author: The Detroit News ; Bill Johnson

Recent news that a Detroit police officer accused of cheating on an exam for sergeant was found guilty of misconduct didn't generate a lot of attention. That's unfortunate, since unanswered questions surrounding the incident remain.

Lest Detroiters forget, former Police Chief Benny Napoleon reneged on a promise to release an internal report that looked into the circumstances surrounding the breach. Chief Charles Wilson, his replacement, has an opportunity to demonstrate more openness.

Jose Hardrick, who was also former Police Chief Isaiah McKinnon 's driver, is the last officer to face charges of misconduct for cheating on the promotional exam. In 1997, Hardrick was accused of taking test questions and answers from former Chief McKinnon 's office prior to the test. According to the arrest warrant, Hardrick's fingerprints appeared on a test booklet that contained questions and answers. He scored 191 out of a possible 200 on the exam, outscoring 99.7 percent of the officers who took the test. This was conspicuous because Hardrick was not known for his academic prowess. He reportedly ranked 22nd in a police academy class of 28, having failed two of the eight exams. On the others, Hardrick scored in the lower third.

The first trial of the six-year veteran ended in a hung jury. The second trial was heard by Wayne County Circuit Judge Brian Sullivan. Hardrick, terminated after the incident, faces up to five years in prison.

His conviction only tells part of the story. In all, eight officers, including McKinnon 's nephew and some of the ex-chief's friends, were investigated after posting near-perfect scores. Included was a former member of McKinnon 's administrative team, a fellow member with McKinnon on the police department's band and an officer once assigned to protect Mayor Dennis Archer, who was a jogging partner of McKinnon 's. All scored between 163 and 195 on the tests...Napoleon promised an internal investigation that would let the "chips fall where they may." Despite repeated reminders, he did not release the result of that investigation before resigning this summer. This caused some to speculate that the department had something to hide.

Hardrick insisted that McKinnon, who retired shortly after the incident, left study documents out on his office sofa and encouraged him to take them. McKinnon , called as a prosecution witness, denied that he gave his driver an advance look at the test material. Rather, McKinnon said, the only help he gave Hardrick was a set of old study questions he used when preparing for promotion tests in the 1960s and '70s..."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks for the info Tom1939. There is no reason to leave any info undisclosed.

Based on all of the reports I have read the people of Detroit were neither served or protected while simmons was there. I am more disgusted with every report I read. For people who are interested check out Detroit Freepress articles dated 5-8-1992, 8-28-1992, also 12-5-1997.

In those articles you will see that a U.S. District Court Judge chastised all of the "top officials" at Detroit PD working under Chief Hart. Chief Hart was the one actually convicted of commiting the crime of embezzlement of drug money, and tax fraud, tax evasion. However, U.S. District Court Judge Paul Gadola accused the "top officials" of Detroit PD (which simmons claims he was) of acts of "omission" meaning they saw the "white collar crime" happening and did nothing.

We cannot elect anyone to our Sheriff's office who has a questionable background, and has overlooked crime right under their own nose. He is either stupid or corrupt. In either case we don't need the worst Detroit ( a city just recently named the worst in America for violent crime) has to offer. If anything we should be sending some of our law enforcement officers there to teach them how it is done. We have an extremely low rate of crime, maybe they could learn something from us.

Thanks again Tom keep the info coming. Dirty cops are the dregs of society, they are the cancer that can't be cured.

Skyspy, for the position of law enforcement officer, character is the ultimate quality all professionals must exhibit. A law enforcement officer is invested with enormous authority. Put a person of low or no character in that position, he or she will have enormous power without the internal control, the necessary character, to exercise that authority properly. That person will dishonor the profession and all other professional law enforcement officers.

I really don't want to bring up old issues but the issue I'm about to bring up speaks volumes about Dave Simmons' character. Without being specific, back in the day when a "negro" police officer was hired on many urban police departments that individual, to prove himself to the other officers before they would work with the "negro" officer, had to "tune up" an innocent "negro" citizen so the word could get back to the precinct the new "negro" officer was safe to work with. Now days an officer has to arrest this innocent person involved in the beating. Back in the day, in the late 1960's, you could "tune them up" and leave them laying, brain damaged, on the street. I think it's ironic that Dave Simmons has joined the NAACP. Perhaps to make amends, I guess.

There were other questionable things Simmons used to do using his police powers that I won't go into. Many officers I've talked to after getting to know him, all had the same assessment ... don't trust him. Honor, trust, loyality to duty and truth, and integrity are character qualities Simmons' always seemed to lack. How can you trust someone who has no character?!?! These are necessary character qualities to be a professional law enforcement officer.

I write these things not to hurt Simmons or embarrass him but to protect him from himself. These things are too important to remain silent especially after seeing the dishonesty in how Simmons is conducting his campaign and subtly try to damage the good names of brother law enforcement officers like Sheriff Johnson and members of our sheriff's department who have served this county with upstanding character and a proper sense of duty to their profession and the public ... selflessly. They will probably retire to much smaller dwellings and be happy that they had the opportunity to serve their communities with honor.

After watching Simmons place himself over his community (Detroit) to achieve what he has today. Then, watching him, now, promote himself as the more qualified candidate over honest, upstanding brother law enforcement officers like those he is running against made my blood boil! I couldn't remain silent!

“It all revolves around character…or the lack thereof!”

You fall into your own category, bring us more than you’re hearsay and opinion.

Opinions are a great thing, they are what YOU think. That is what you are trying to sell here.

But facts are, I (and probably the other bloggers here) would like to see more here than your accusations and hearsay, give us some links to verify your facts, beside guilty by association.

Lord knows we are all guilty by association one time or another in our life for something.

I really don’t care one way or another about the Sheriff’s race. Either of the four current candidates, win or loose, will not change the quality of my daily life or my way of thinking and living.

But I think you are pushing the envelope here, and Cal just might find it a little abrasive also seeing the direction you seem to be heading in. Then again I might be wrong.

BuZZard, on the surface I would agree with you. The information does seem a little over the top. And, for someone outside of police culture this can be shocking information. However, let's think it through. It can seem extremely distasteful when someone's privacy and personal life is being exposed in a public place.

The events I wrote about at Second Precinct were done for a reason, to test the trustworthiness of a new officer. Many other officers were involved in this incident. Those officers told other officers at the precinct, that was why it was done, so word could get back to the station house. This is how I heard about the beating. Those officers told other officers. It was the talk of the precinct. This was pre-Internal Affairs era policing. What if that individual from long ago was your son, BuZZard? Would you still think this was "over the top?" Doesn't that damaged person from long ago deserve justice ... even today?

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. This is a public place, nothing is being whispered behind someone's back. Over my long career I had developed into a pretty good suspect interrogator. I would encourage someone reading this to ask Dave Simmons about this Second Precinct event early in his career. Or, have him post a response here for us to see. Otherwise, post the exact words of his response here. As an interrogator, I'll break down his response and interpret it for you. It is easy to put this to a test!

Being a law enforcement officer requires being judged by a higher standard. Plus, a police officer is not a common private citizen. Wearing that uniform, badge and gun and enforcing the public's laws makes that individual different. In addition, running for public office means all aspects of the candidates private life must be examined. Running for the public office of the top law enforcement officer in the area requires all aspects of the candidate's character be examined. Dave Simmons is running for a public office. Dave Simmons admitted things from his past were probably going to start coming to the surface if and when he ran for the sheriff's office.

BuZZard, if you were a city mayor selecting a police chief to run the police department in your city, what things in the candidate's background check would disqualify a candidate ... in your mind? Would you, as the highest city official, select someone from an ethically challenged and problematic police department? Even if the candidate did nothing on paper that can be located, would you still hire a candidate that spent decades as an executive on an ethically challenged and problmatic police department? Would it make any difference in your selection process?

Law enforcement officers and law enforcement executives are held to a higher standard than dog catchers or garbage collectors! For that matter, all individuals running for public office are held to a higher standard. Otherwise, the line between the law and lawnessless will become blurred. However, BuZZard, I completely understand the basis of your discomfort. It is painful to see someone's "private garbage" put on public display.

However, remember, actions taken as a public servant, functioning in a capacity serving the public's interest and trust, is the public's business! It is not someone's private business. They gave up their right to privacy when they accepted the public's paycheck! If there is anything someone wishes to keep as their private, personal business ... they simply shouldn't run for public office!

Therefore, as long as what is being spoken is true and factual, about the public conduct and behavior of an individual's performance while serving in his or her public role, and that individual is seeking a public office, nothing is "over the top" because there is no expectation of personal privacy while conducting the public's business and seeking the public's office.

Please reread my blog. (last paragraph)

Actually it sounds like you were also part of the problem. You started blogging in third person now you are in first person. Maybe you need to reread all your blogs.

I read what you are saying, guilty till proven innocent.
But I believe a man is innocent till proven guilty.

You have given no evidence to the contrary.

You are still not giving us anymore than your accusations and hearsay. Be it in first, second, or third person.

Sorry, facts are facts!

...on the platform that I am the most qualified sheriff candidate based on my Detroit police department executive history. BuZZard, let's say I am and I was part of the problem on the Detroit police department. In this, you accept there was and continues to be a problem on the Detroit police department that necessitated the US Justice Department to come in and oversee that problematic department. This is an established fact!

If you advance the premise that I am part of the problem, embedded in your premise is an acceptance that Detroit police executive, Dave Simmons, was responible for managing the problem that I am a part, since he was in an executive management position. He admits this and it is an established fact. He and I were on the Detroit police department, while he was a high level Detroit police executive for many years on that troubled police department that I was, as you state, part of the problem.

BuZZard, here's the conclusion of our argument. Therefore, if you accept that I am part of the problem and Dave Simmons managed that problem that I was part, why would anyone put Dave Simmons in a management position on another law enforcement agency? Is his past police department executive management performance a good predictor and indicator of his probable future police executive management performance?

BuZZard, you can attack me all day and night but stop a while and answer that question. Am I in error for causing a discussion of this important question?

Also, there is and has been no discussion of guilt ... except by you, BuZZard. Do you believe there are criminal or legal issue involved? Why do you, unconsciously, jump to a discussion of guilt? My issue is and has always been over Dave Simmons' character and qualifications based on my knowledge and observations of him.

Facts, written in first, second or third person don't change and are not rendered less credible. Only the voice in the writing style changes. BuZZard, to attack facts one must discuss the validity of those facts under discussion not attempt to deflect to another (non) issue like the bogus issue of first, second or third voice. However, you seem to accept my facts, not like them, attack me. That is perfectly fine. But, again, BuZZard, merely ask Dave Simmons about his beating of an innocent man to establish his "street cred" at Second Precinct, post his response and we will discuss it. How can I be more forthcoming and factual?

Sorry to have bothered you to begin with.
I had no business asking for facts and verification to your accusations and hearsay.

I think I’ll just leave you to your fermenting Kool-Aid.

Enjoy

buZZard ... your pun has rendered me speechless. I understand my statements are strident and put you and other neutral and fair minded citizens in an awkward position. Your post and statements toward me, I see as your attempt to remain neutral and fair. I don't take your statements personal. As a fair minded person you don't want any potentially politically motivated claims to damage someone's reputation. I completely understand this.

I am in no way connected to anyone running for the office of sheriff that currently works in the sheriff's office. Ask every candidate running for sheriff ... none of them will have the slightest idea who, in the hell, I am.

Because of my unique position and experience leading me to possess certain knowledge, if I had not provided this useful information on Simmons' background how else would that information been made available? Isn't information a good thing? The more information the better! Don't shoot the messager!

On one hand, Simmons claims his police department executive management experience makes him head and shoulders above to rest. On the other hand, when I started posting details of the mis-management by Detroit police executives of that department, Simmons stated the department was in a bad situation for a long time and he shouldn't be held responsible or accountable.

As a Detroit police executive he is claiming his executive experience with Detroit is what makes him uniquely qualified. But, the mismanagement by department executives is not his responsibility although he was one of the executives running that department. Do you see the irony and contradiction?

It's like attempting to put lipstick on a pig ... when I point out it's a pig with lipstick, Simmons wants to distance himself from the pig that he, earlier, was attempting to put the lipstick on. Is it possible to have it both ways?

Take care

I thought Tom1939 was full of crap too,.......until I read the reports and talked to two reporters from Detroit Free Press.

His current article from Sept. 2001 is true.....so are these read reports from 5-8-1992, 8-28-1992, and 12-5-1997.

Dirty cops are a cancer on society. The character of anyone taking the "oath of office to SERVE and PROTECT" is absolutely important. When they fail to uphold their oath of office we all suffer.

The one statment that really sealed the deal for me was when the U.S. District Court Judge Paul Gadola gave a 90min. lecture to the "top Officials" of Detroit PD ( simmons alleges that he had a "top managment" position) The U.S. District Court Judge accused the "top officials under Chief Hart of being guilty of acts of ommission. Meaning they knew he was embezzling the drug funds and did nothing to stop it or blow the whistle.

This is an exact quote from Judge Paul Gadola during Ex-Chief Harts sentencing hearing, report dated 8-28-1992 Detroit Free Press:

"there is a rotten situation at police headquarters under Hart, where "top officials" became the proverbial "old boys" network circling defensivly as federal investigators zeroed in on Chief Hart"

"various "command officers" must have known what the Chief was doing they must have known it was wrong. Yet no one did anything or said anything"

I can't elect anyone to the Sheriff's Office if they are willing to overlook crime. This guy is either stupid, or corrupt, or he was never a "top official" at Detroit PD. In either case I can't trust him.

You know me I just sit on the fence and watch.
And you know I don’t care one way or the other.

But I think we were getting a little close to the edge with the innuendoes’ of the post I replied to.
Otherwise have at it and enjoy.

Have a safe evening

...to the public. Google the terms "police deviance."

Skyspy, I have thought long and hard about what happened on the Detroit police department. This is what I've been able to come up with as a possible explanation by much reading and studying and observations of officers I've come into contact with.

On any law enforcement system there will exists a small group of "deviant" police officers that slip though the cracks. But, this small group of deviant cops will remain relatively small and powerless on a police force.

When the late Democratic Mayor, Coleman Young, was elected in the early 1970's and started setting up his political machine and the patronage system, since Coleman Young was lawless, he was a "numbers runner" in Detroit, he attracted to his patronage system some of the most deviant officers on the Detroit police force. And, they used the Coleman Young corrupt political machine to rise into power positions on the Detroit police department. Their pre-existing tendency toward deviance, in the Coleman Young corrupt political machine, gave these officers an advantage. The Young political machine rewarded their deviance to the point where Detroit police Chief Hart, and possibly other police executives, stole more than $2 million that was to fight drugs in Detroit. To the point where Detroit police Chief McKinnon was, alleged, to have passed out a police department promotional exam, with the answers, to his friends.

Police deviant behavior does not surface out of the blue. Deviant police behavior usually manifest in small ways, and on a small scale, early in a police officers history on a police force. On the Detroit police department, for many years, the inmates literally took over the asylum.

What a bunch of idiotic garbage. It sounds like you have nothing better to do than rip the reputation of a police and security professional. Could be that Mr. Simmons does not fit your description of a "southern" law enforcement official. Your comments remind me of the movie, "In the heat of the night".

Well, then Mr. Steuer CPP, I assure you that "ripping the reputation" is not what was intended. Believe that as you will. However, many of us here are not duped into believing that someone with the claimed credentials of Mr. Simmons is the "most qualified of the candidates" for the office of Sheriff in Fayette or any county, northern or southern United States! I see you claim the same CPP credential, so answer this for us. If you are/were an experienced police or security professional yourself (assuming so by the credential), that when law enforcement officers (especially former high ranking administrators) retire, they enjoy their hard earned retirement or they take jobs in private sector high paying security jobs, usually as owners or consultants. Mr. Simmons claims he obtained his CPP certification and has been running his own company since he retired. Yet, we have no proof of any actual work, training, or anything related to law enforcement or even security from him since he left the Highland Park agency in 1996/1997. How would you feel working for a person who has not had any current training/experience in over 10-11 years yet continously claims to be the most qualified candidate??

Just because a person has not worked in his/her own profession in a number of years is not an indication that he/she has forgtten how to do his/her job. The CPP designation is earned by numerious qualifications including taking a 4 hour written examination including aspects of both police and security topics. Once a person has earned the certification, that person must recertify every three (3) years by earning sixty (60) credits, half of which must be earned in continuing education. My comments were in now way meant to besmearch anyone but I take offense when someone with David's reputation, professionaism and character are questioned. I have know David for over 20 years and he has always been one of the most respected public officials.

Mr. Steuer if a person's years of experience are enough and they don't forget what they have learned, why would anyone need retraining or recertification? You can't be that naive to think that procedures and the types of situations often changing don't require a need for current training and current knowledge. You also don't get that type of training from books either!

The State of GA requires all certified peace officers to attend at least 20 hours of training EACH year and not every three years as your CPP certification. That 20 hours is the State requirement, not representative of each particular agency. Some require hundreds of hours and some go with the State requirement. Obviously, the more well trained a department's officers are, the better the service that is usually provided to the general public. Agreed?

Learning about the required hours for maintaining CPP certification is nice to know. We have no mention from Mr. Simmons of any training or work he has done that has kept him current on law enforcement training, procedures, or anything related since he retired in 1996. (He claims he has been running his own business since but doesn't list any clientele or particulars about any of that.) However, 60 hours for CPP certification is not the same as law enforcement training. If it were, I am sure GA POST Council would honor CPP certifications/training as equivalent in some way. In choosing a qualified candidate for our next Sheriff, we would rather look more for someone who has certifications in current law enforcement procedures. Mr. Simmons training is all in the past ways of policing, nothing current. Mr. Simmons isn't even a certified POST instructor or Field Training Officer. How then is he more qualified to teach/lead/serve any department?

I am having difficulty understanding your reasoning. You state that certified police officers in GA need 20 hours of training each year not every 3 years as for CPP certification. I believe that 20 hours times 3 years equals 60 hours, the exact same as the CPP. Just for clarification, many government agencies i.e. US Air Force recognizes the CPP as the only police/security certification. We all need to keep up with changes in our professions and in maintaining 60 hours for recertification, that goal is accomplished. It is interesting to see that most candidates for public office have no experience for that office, Senators Clinton, Obama and McCain for example but yet they are running while Mr. Simmons has many years of police/security experience. As in all cases, the voters will speak their minds in the voting booth and not on blogs. I am not fortunate to live in GA but spent military time there and I believe that the people of GA will be well served by Mr. Simmons.

Yes, it does equal out to the same amount of hours, however GA requires 20 hours each year. With your CPP certification you are required to achieve the hours over a three year period. I for one, also wish the State would require more than just the 20 already required.

A CPP certification may be recognized by the Air Force as police/security certification, however it is not recognized by GA POST council which certifies peace officers. Someone can not serve in a law enforcement position in GA, or any state I am aware of, solely on CPP certification. Someone with CPP certification would still have to receive peace officer certification- meaning a CPP certification doesn't make you qualified to serve in a law enforcement capacity. Someone who served in a military police unit receives training, certifications, and experience also, but isn't qualified to serve as a law enforcement officer until they receive POST certification. People who go to work for the TSA receive training in police/security issues as does Loss Prevention agents for most department stores, but would you say that qualifies them to be your next county Sheriff or Police Chief??

Dave Simmons is a GA POST certified peace officer, he is simply not employed by a police agency and therefore is not a "sworn" officer. Because of this he currently has no mor arrest power than you or I. Yes, in GA private citizens do have the power to make arrests, although only for felonies and certain misdeamenors committed in their precense. Even if he was not certified the State of GA gives all candidates for Sheriff priority at regional police academies to become certified, both after qualifying for the office as well as within six months of taking the oath of office. You may look it up under Title 15 O.C.G.A. which outlines the duties and powers of the Sheriff. The fact is Dave Simmons is more than qualified to become the next Sheriff of Fayette County. Good day sir.

I understand that Mr. Simmons is GA Post certified. I am not debating that. My understanding is that he was certified in Fulton County back in 2000. Why, though? It doesn't make sense. Do you know why he would have gone to attain peace officer certification (while he was RETIRED) unless he desired a job in law enforcement that he either didn't get or fails to mention for some reason??

Mr. Simmons has failed to address any jobs, training, or anything else he has done since he retired in 1996, except his CPP stuff. Meanwhile, our other three candidates have all been working hard and receiving current training in law enforcement of TODAY!

I do congratulate both Simmons and Steuer on their achievement of CPP certification. However, a CPP certification has absolutely nothing to do with being qualified to serve in a law enforcement role. Any training received for maintaining a CPP certification does not even count toward POST training. It does not in my mind make him more qualified and equal in comparison to the other candidates.

from your posts it appeared you were not aware he is certified. I cannot tell you why he was chose to become certified in 2000. I do know that was only a couple/few years after he moved to Fayette County. Maybe he just wanted to do it for the hell of it? Maybe he was considering a position with an agency and wanted to go ahead and get certified? Maybe he intended to run for Sheriff back then but opted to wait until Randall retired? I do know he is currently certified, and like all other peace officers in GA has had to take atleast the minimun 20 hrs of annual training in order to keep his current certification. This is up to date training. The more popular annual training courses are those like "legal update" which are often taught by attorneys/prosecutors and keep the officer informed of how the law has changed from one year to the next. If you feel he has failed to address certain things I think you should write or call him instead of just blogging about it. I'm sure he will be happy to answer your questions and address your concerns.