”It’s better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it” - Maurice Switzer
Sometimes it’s not what you say it’s how you say it, and sometimes it’s what you don’t say that speaks volumes. In response to my July “Rumor Mill” column regarding the allegation by a Utah woman that County Board Chairman Travis Lingenfelter “raped” her “violently” in a county vehicle, the alleged perpetrator asked to speak to me after a public event downtown. So I secretly recorded him, which is legal in AZ. In hindsight he probably realizes he should have chosen to remain silent, but I’m awfully glad he didn’t.
It was a rather revealing conversation on multiple levels, one which I intend to make public, and Lingenfelter was visibly upset. He tried to show me a Sheriff’s report on his phone that he insisted essentially cleared him and I told him to email me whatever he wanted me to see, but he never sent me any proof that he didn’t rape that woman. Instead he eventually emailed me what was basically a demand for a retraction, which I will not do. Sue me you whining little bitch, I stand by everything I wrote. Well except the part about him running a Vitamin C company out of his home. After additional research I’m not convinced he’s currently running any legitimate business, and I have evidence to back up that belief. I’m not afraid of a very public civil trial, but he probably should be.
The Sheriff Report, Incident No. 25-015357, which I obtained through a public record request, is such a hot mess that it can neither indict nor exonerate Lingenfelter, and it raises many more questions than it answers. I have to ask, was Lt. Coffin simply grossly incompetent or intentionally malfeasant, was the badge cam turned off while the alleged evidence was collected or the digital record deleted later, and was the physical evidence handled in such a manner as to forever render it inadmissible? My inquiring mind wants to know.
And why was the inspection of the vehicle and collection of reported evidence that was listed as logged into evidence, but never sent to a lab for analysis, not referred to an outside agency? Especially considering the obvious conflict of interest, in that budget negotiations were taking place and the Sheriff’s Department wanted a budget increase with employee raises on the table before the Board that Lingenfelter is Chairman of and votes on. And the appearance of impropriety and favoritism that any reasonable person might question given that Sheriff Schuster wrote a glowing testimonial in support of Lingenfelter’s 2024 reelection campaign and the documented fact that uniformed officers appeared in a campaign related photo that may have been taken in Lingenfelter’s driveway.
And since the alleged victim did not file a formal complaint with the Sheriff’s Office, who initiated and arranged the bizarre report?
As I perform my due diligence, I have filed additional public records requests, and when I have receive them I will be transparent about what the documents contain.
Does an innocent man rush out and hire a fancy “criminal law specialist” attorney out of Phoenix to write a letter to the County Attorney whose budget he also has input and a vote on? I’ll let you decide.
At the September 2nd Board of Supervisors meeting I stated my concerns about the Incident Report during the “Call to the Public”, and you can watch the video of that on YouTube. Rather than address the content of my public statements from the podium, Lingenfelter chose to respond with a personal attack against my integrity and to demean this publication. I wonder what “The Body Language Guy” on Rumble would say about his reaction. As for me, I think the Chairman doth protest too much.