My automobile insurance investigated this accident and found the "white" female guilty of causing the accident. The South Holland Police Department did not investigate the accident.
March 29, 2005
Mr. Don DeGraff, Mayor of South Holland
16226 Wausau Ave.
South Holland, Illinois 60473
Mr. Warren Millsaps
Chief of Police
16220 Wausau Ave.
South Holland, Illinois 60473
Mr. Hollis Dorrough, Deputy Chief
South Holland Police Department
16220 Wausau Avenue
South Holland, Illinois 60473
Mr. Barak Obama
230 South Dearborn St., Suite 3900
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Mr. Obama:
I would like this information to become part of the claim I submitted to the office listed above on February 11, 2005.
The South Holland Police Department (SHPD) continues to practice disparate and indifferent treatment. The blatant disregard and egregious treatment of African-Americans in South Holland continues on a regular basis. My complaints to this police department are ignored. I am never contacted by this police department to discuss my complaints. They will probably ignore me and this complaint as well.
On March 18, 2005 I was involved in a three-car accident at 170th and Langley. Involved in the car accident was a white woman (Denise Lenting) and her passenger (Bonita Vasquez) driving a Toyota Camry, license plate number 3472264; a black woman (Mary Ambrose) and her son (Sullivan Ambrose age 14) driving a Lexus, license plate number 2720486; and my car (Fred Nance, a black man) driving a Nissan Altima, license plate number 1268347.
Each person gave their account of the accident to SHPD officer Kremski, ID #106. I have written about this police officer many times coming to my house harassing and intimidating me (see documents I submitted to you on February 11, 2005).
On the date in question, the train had the westbound traffic blocked on 170th Street. The train tracks are located at 170th Street and Park Avenue. The westbound traffic was stopped at 170th and Park Avenue, East of the tracks.
The accident occurred at 170th and Langley. Langley is approximately one (1) block east of Park Avenue. The Toyota was driving southbound on Langley. The Toyota came off of Langley Street, onto 170th Street and proceeded into the eastbound traffic without looking to see if there was any traffic traveling east on 170th Street. The Nissan was traveling east on 170th Street in the outside lane closest to the curb. The Lexus was traveling east on 170th Street on the inside lane.
Both the Lexus (which was in front of the Nissan traveling south on Park Avenue approaching 170th Street) and Nissan turned off of Park Avenue to travel east on 170th Street. The Lexus and Nissan were traveling approximately 10 to 15 miles per hour. We had just turned onto 170th Street, and the point of impact happened approximately one block away at Langley Street.
There was an outside witness to the accident, Ms. Laura Clemons, license plate number C936809, telephone number 708-331-2291. As the Toyota came off of Langley to proceed onto 170th Street, Ms. Clemons blew her car horn continuously attempting to alert the Toyota driver to the oncoming traffic, the Lexus and Nissan. The Toyota ignored the warning.
The Lexus saw the Toyota coming from between the cars and attempted to avoid the collision by coming into the lane of the Nissan. The Toyota hit the front driver’s side wheel of the Lexus. The Lexus was forced into the Nissan’s lane. The Nissan attempted to avoid the accident by swerving in the direction (to the right, south) that the Toyota was forcing the Lexus to go in because the Toyota’s passenger side front bumper hit the Lexus pushing it into the lane of the Nissan. The Lexus came into the Nissan’s lane to quickly for the Nissan to avoid striking the Lexus’ rear passenger side of the car.
The Lexus and Nissan driver gave the above information to Officer Kremski. Officer Kemski ignored the information about Ms. Clemons stating that if she was a witness she should have stayed on the scene. I asked him why would she have to stay on the scene if she gave her information up freely to be contacted by SHPD. I asked Officer Kremski doesn’t he do an investigation into the facts of the matter. He informed me that he only questions people on the scene about car accidents.
I asked him why didn’t he issue tickets so that a fact-finder, such as the courts, could get testimony and seek all witnesses. Officer Kremski informed me that because of his past experiences with traffic court and people not showing up has discouraged him from giving tickets at the scene of accidents. This is ludicrous.
Officer Kremski interviewed the Toyota’s passenger, Ms. Bonita Vasquez, about the accident and reported her on the Illinois Traffic Crash Report as a “passenger/witness. Officer Kremski did not question or attempt to question the Lexus drivers’ son, Sullivan Ambrose age 14-years-old. The Lexus driver informed Officer Kremski that her son was a passenger in her automobile. Officer Kremski did not list the Lexus drivers’ son, on the Illinois Traffic Crash Report as a passenger/witness. When I questioned Officer Kremski about this, on or about March 23, 2005 approximately 5 days after the accident, he reported that it was his error, but he could not change the Illinois Traffic Crash Report. (I had been to the SHPD everyday after the accident but Officer Kremski reported off sick. I reported my issues to Lt. Pedric and Sgt. Tavanaro.).
This method of operation condoned by the SHPD creates more problems for people who have car accidents. If the police are not going to attempt to question “all potential witnesses” how will truth be determined? I have never heard of a police officer not having the duty to question any witness in a crime/accident where they were called upon to do so.
This has caused my insurance company to view the accident as if “fault” could not be determined by the SHPD. If it had been a “black” man or woman, the SHPD would have issued tickets. They would have called witnesses if a “white” person told them there were witnesses. It is mind-bogging to think that a police department, which is a fact-finder as legally defined, would not attempt to determine the truth of a matter by calling the phone number of a potential witness given at the scene by a participant in the accident or if the police officer did not want to bother with that approach, the police officer could have given everyone a ticket and let the courts figure it out.
If the car accident participant took the time to gather pertinent information at the scene of an accident, it would appear that the SHPD would act appropriately to the information. If this were a murder scene, would the SHPD ignore witnesses and testimony? I have been told several times by the SHPD that they operate on criminal matters, not civil matters. A traffic accident technically goes to criminal court and is identified by the criminal code. Officer Kremski had a duty to act on the information given to him to assist in fact-finding procedures.
If nothing else, he could have given tickets to all of us if he did not feel like getting involved. Then the participants in the accident could have presented our “evidence and witnesses” to the court. There is no reason in the world why Officer Kremski should not have interviewed the Lexus driver’s son, who remained on the scene of the accident. Officer Kremski’s reason for not pursuing witness Ms. Clemons is that she left the scene of the accident. This is disparate and indifferent treatment.
Please investigate.
Thank you.
Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC
