At the last two Arnold city council meetings, Arnold residents have questioned whether police chief Bob Shockey is fit for duty. The reason for these questions are his statements in his lawsuit against the city and two council members (Moss and Borgelt). In the suit, he claimed that he “has suffered extreme pain and suffering, emotional distress, depression, loss of peace of mind, and will in the future suffer emotional distress.” This has led some to question (p. 4) whether he should be carrying a gun or if he should be placed on medical leave.
KMOV Channel 4 picked up on these concerns and ran a story on the issue yesterday. In it, Shockey rejects these concerns.
Shockey said his job has never been affected by the harassment.
“My job has never suffered. It will never,” said Shockey, “And if it does, I’ll be the first to remove me from it.”
This statement seems rather at odds with Shockey’s lawsuit. In addition to the claimed suffering mentioned above, Shockey alleged the following effects of the purported harassment:
- “Was exposed to a hostile, offensive, and intimidating work environment”
- The defendants statements “injured his personal and professional reputation”
- “Mental and physical pain, anguish, and distress”
- “Irreparable injury”
So he experienced all of these symptoms, but his work was not affected at all? He was not affected professionally by the intimidating work environment or the injury to his reputation? If these allegations are true, that seems hard to believe. Is he claiming that these issues affect him only personally, and he doesn’t bring them to work? How often do people succeed in trying to do that?
If Shockey was professionally unaffected by the treatment he claims to have received, perhaps his request for financial compensation is unwarranted. Maybe this article should be attached to a Motion to Dismiss filed by the lawyers for Ken Moss and Doris Borgelt.
Shockey might be regretting this lawsuit right now. But probably not, since a payday still remains within reach.