In August of 2009, David Howard of South Dakota filed for damages in a civil suit against Iowa DOT and IDOT Officer Darrell Wiegand. The suit stems from an incident on June 6, 2005 when then sixty-seven-year-old Mr. Howard lost his way after dark while trying to make a truck delivery in Mt. Pleasant, Iowa.
http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/Wiegand-assualt-080409
http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/IDOT-081309
After Mr. Howard was stopped on a deadend street by Iowa DOT Officer Darrell Wiegand, the incident quickly escalated into a serious situation from which Mr. Howard emerged with severe head injuries that have affected his health and wellbeing ever since.The actions of Officer Wiegand were observed by several other truckers who were parked nearby, and even captured on videotape.
Officer Wiegand took Mr. Howard to jail for insulting a law enforcement officer but in the morning when Mr. Howard appeared in court the judge took one look at him and dismissed the charges. Later, Mr. Howard registered a complaint with IDOT officials who met with him at his home to conduct an “investigation.” Mr. Howard described to them what had happened and they thanked him for his help. Then they went away and he never heard from them again.
Mr. Howard hired a lawyer and tried to take Officer Wiegand and IDOT to court in Mt. Pleasant but the Henry County Attorney refused to hear his case. After this, Mr. Howard lived with pain and humiliation for a long time, so long in fact that this past summer he needed to refile his case due to time limitations or give it up for good.
That was when his attorney forwarded him a number of newspaper articles in which a Fort Madison couple claimed in March 2009 to have been harassed and menaced by this very same officer Darrell Wiegand, and to David Howard it all sounded all too familiar. http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/IDOT-controversy-04
The Schneiders of Fort Madison also had lodged a complaint with IDOT against Officer Wiegand. In April 2009, they too had IDOT officials come to their home and talk about the “investigation” they were engaged in. And even though during the time the officials were visiting, the Schneiders’ phone actually rang several times with calls from people who had similarly disturbing stories about Officer Wiegand, the officials maintained that Officer Wiegand had had no previous complaints against him! Then in August when the Schneiders learned what had happened to David Howard, the only possible conclusion to be reached was that IDOT officials, Iowa Ombudsman, and Governor Culver (all of whom had been apprised of the Schneiders’ complaint) weren’t telling the truth.
In fact, the Schneiders and David Howard have received a runaround from the state of Iowa. According to the state, the “investigations” of Officer Wiegand’s behavior by Iowa DOT, Iowa Ombudsman, and the governor’s office must by law remain confidential. Citing a law pertaining to personnel records, officials have repeatedly refused to reveal a shred of information that would give anybody confidence they have been dealing with the actions of this officer in a manner that protects the safety of the citizens of Iowa.
All the state would acknowledge in the Schneiders’ situation was that Officer Wiegand was put on paid administrative leave and subsequently reinstated. In addition, Iowa DOT Director Nancy Richardson appeared disaffected and dismissive of the Schneiders’ complaint, while an Iowa Ombudsman representative reportedly laughed behind their backs that they might be so foolish as to think they had a case. It was also reportedly suggested that Mr. Howard didn’t have a case for Iowa Ombudsman to pursue because his version of what happened was not the same as Officer Wiegand’s! Lastly, Governor Culver was not the least forthcoming: he did not have the courtesy to personally answer the Schneiders’ letter of concern.
Such is the current state of corruption in Iowa. In total disregard for transparency and accountability, not to mention citizens’ safety, the Iowa Attorney General now wants to dismiss Mr. Howard’s lawsuit .
http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/IDOT-090509
http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/57574597.html
David Howard deserves better than this. He deserves to have his case heard and to receive some compensation for all that he has been through. And Iowa citizens also deserve to have this case heard because it is clear that at least one law enforcement officer and several of our government agencies have become so arrogant they believe their power is unassailable.
The Friends of David Howard humbly ask for your help in the form of donations for Mr. Howard’s medical bills (over $40,00 to date ) and also attorney and court fees (which are fast piling up.) Now seventy- one, Mr. Howard is still behind the wheel of his semi much of the time, although his wife Mary Ann’s recent surgery has curtailed his hours somewhat of late.
You may send contributions in David Howard’s name to:
FRIENDS OF DAVID HOWARD
P.O. Box 204
Fort Madison, Iowa 52627
Remember that by making a donation you will not only be supporting Mr. Howard but also taking a step towards curbing an apparently rogue officer and more than one government agency which sadly seem to be spinning out of control.
A recent letter to the Burlington HawkEye:
A reply, please
To Iowa DOT director, Nancy Richardson:
As Iowa DOT director, you are a public servant. Therefore, it is your responsibility to prove to the people of Iowa:
* Did or did not DOT officer, Darrell Wiegand, insult and assault Mr. and Mrs. Carl Schnieder?
* Did or did not Wiegand pistol whip 71-year-old David Howard (see The Hawk Eye, p. 1A, Aug. 4, 2009). “Iowa DOT is not compelled to keep secret its probe of officers action” stated the Aug. 2, 2009 The Hawk Eye, p. 6A.
* Does or does not the DOT sneer at Iowa motorists?
* Does or does not the DOT mock the Iowa credo, “Our liberties we prize and our rights we maintain”?
Ms. Richardson, please reply in The Hawk Eye.
MARTHA JORDAN-WEYGANT
Burlington
To keep the record straight, the Schneiders never claimed they were physically assaulted by Officer Wiegand. However, they felt it was a definite possibility he would do them physical injury if they did not comply with everything he requested, i.e. The only reason they allowed him to search their RV was to placate him. And after accusing them of having marijuana on board, Mr. Wiegand found nothing untoward inside the cab or the living quarters of their RV.
All this seemed to frustrate Mr. Wiegand and further escalate his ill temper. He began to lecture and harangue Mr. Schneider on the firearms in his possession, the only trouble being that Mr. Wiegand was misinformed/ignorant on the laws. Nor would he allow Mr. Schneider to express his (correct) knowledge of the laws.