If you took a look at the news Monday everyone was all the rage about sex offenders and the fact there are numerous inaccuracies on registries across the state.  With all due respect to the outrage of the day, if you as individual are really concerned about protecting your children from sexual predators, as I have said before, don’t look on the registry, look in your photo album.

Contrary to popular opinion most sex offenders and their victims are not strangers.  According to the U.S. Justice Department it is a blatant myth that most sexual assaults are committed by strangers.  The Department found that nearly 60 percent of boys and 80 percent of girls who are sexually victimized are done so by someone known to the child or the child’s family.  So if your child is going to come into contact with a sex offender it will probably be a relative, family friend, babysitter, local religious figure, teacher or someone in a position of authority over the child or someone who supervises the child. Forget the stranger with candy and the raincoat.  If that’s not enough, here are some other fun little facts.

Most sex offenders are not caught, convicted and in prison. Only a fraction of those who commit sexual assault are caught and convicted. In addition, up to half of all cases of child molestation are committed by other adolescents between the ages of 13 to 17. There are some more stats I could throw at you, but I figure I’ve scared you enough.

If the citizens of Indiana  want to protect their children from child predators, they may want to start by doing a check of the people around them. Like the data says, it’s probably not the guy down the street who’s more likely to molest your child, but like vampires, it’s the one you’ve already let into your home.

(The sad part of this is that I wrote most of this column five years ago, and not much has changed.)

A friend of mine who I can best describe as “Democrat leaning” was lamenting the other day about how he really didn’t have any choices in the upcoming May 8 primary.

So I told him if he was bored with his own party maybe he should go where the action is and look at the GOP primary.   Lugar v. Mourdock is the hottest political ticket in town these days and up until a few days ago Indiana was on the verge of having another presidential primary that mattered.

My buddy told me he would get back with me, but he did give me some food for thought. Why do we have primaries anyway? What’s the point?

A political primary is basically a party function where the two main parties decide whom their nominees will be in the general election. Do we really need a primary, or in other words, a taxpayer funded private event to do this?

Why can’t Republicans and Democrats simply do their own caucus or nominating convention and then put forward the candidates they want in the general election? Is all this really necessary? Do we really need to spend money holding elections and printing ballots and hiring poll workers for what should be a private political event?

How many places in Indiana only have one person running for a particular office in a primary?  Heck even at the state level, the voters don’t pick the Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor or Superintendent of Public Instruction nominees in a primary? They are all chosen during a state party nominating convention.

Now, this is the part where someone steps up and says we need a primary system; otherwise, the party bosses will pick who the candidates will be and outsiders would never get a chance to run or participate.

My response: So what?

A political nominating process is a private event. Let the two parties go out and recruit the best candidates, train them, give them resources and then present them to the voters. Why is this a bad thing?

However, if you must insist on a primary in hopes of keeping the flames of democracy alive and kicking, might I suggest a consolidated primary? It’s something done in my home state of Illinois for municipal elections.

Yeah, yeah I know. Mentioning Illinois and elections may not seem like the brightest thing, but hear me out on this one. During municipal elections, there are no Republican or Democratic ballots, just the individuals who are running for an office are listed, usually in the order that they filed. No one is identified by party. You go in and vote and the top two vote getters face each other in a runoff – unless one gets more than 50 percent of the vote.

The other nice thing about an Illinois consolidated primary is that if there is a runoff, the general election is held a few weeks later so voters don’t have endure a long, drawn out and at times, ridiculous, campaign season.

I think my buddy would be much more excited about a primary like this than the one we have now. In fact, I think a lot of people would.

I’ll be doing a little on-air radio work this morning at 11.  I’ll be filling on the “Back to Business” Radio program at my old stomping grounds of WXNT-AM, Newstalk 1430 .   We’ll be talking about the State of the City and I’ll have some audio from Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard and City-Council Vice-President Brian Mahern.  You’re welcome to join in the conversation.

It looks like Stephen Clay is on his way to be appointed to the Indianapolis Police Merit Board.  I wonder if anyone did a thorough background check?

It’s apparent that for some of you we are going to have to agree to disagree on whether Frank Straub should be reappointed as Public Safety Director, so let’s set that aside for a moment while I ask a simple hypothetical.

You are now in charge of public safety in Indianapolis.  Your power is no greater nor less than that of the current public safety director.  How would you reform IMPD?  Or does it need even reform?  Feel free to elaborate for as long as you like.  I have plenty of server space.

By the way,  I’ll be back on the radio Sunday on WXNT-AM (1430) filling for my friend Nathan Thornberry on his “Back to Business” radio show.  It runs Sunday morning from 11 until noon.  One of the topics we’ll be discussing will be the Bisard case.

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard, Public Safety Director Frank Straub and newly appointed acting IMPD Police Chief Rick Hite went before the media this afternoon to tell the public that the second vial of blood in the David Bisard drunk driving case had been mishandled and several IMPD staff were being put on administrative leave and current chief Paul Ciesielski was stepping down from his position.

According to city officials, the second vial of Bisard blood was improperly transferred from the property room to long term storage with several other vials of blood.   The Mayor and Public Safety would not say whether it was done accidentally or with malicious intent.  However they did say the transfer may have compromised the investigation.  Several staff members, including IMPD Deputy Chief Val Cunningham have been placed administrative leave with pay pending the investigation.   Chief Ciesielski turned in his resignation as Chief and the Hite was appointed to take his place.

The Mayor called it an embarrassment for the city and says he is calling the FBI to help investigate.  Straub says the screw up once again underlined the need to continue the department reforms.  However, Bill Owensby, the head of the Fraternal order of Police which has been at odds with Straub say the public safety director should have also turned in his resignation as well.

As to the impact on the Bisard case, the Marion County prosecutor’s office issued a statement this afternoon saying,

“We are currently working with an independent lab to clarify the implications of testing the blood from the second vial, and do not yet know if or how the blood was affected.  We do not know the events that transpired causing Officer Bisard’s blood to be moved while in IMPD’s custody, and we are exceedingly concerned that it occurred.  I met with the victims and victims’ families this morning at 11a.m. to inform them.

At this time, we do not believe these developments will negatively impact the prosecution of this case.  Regardless of these developments, this office is continuing to move forward with the prosecution against Officer Bisard.”

You can hear the entire news conference below, as well as subsequent comments from FOP President Bill Owensby.

Leon-Tailored Interview: IMPD Bisard News Conference – 1 (15 min)

Leon-Tailored Interview: IMPD Bisard News Conference – 2  (15 min)

Leon-Tailored Interview: FOP President Bill Owensby on Bisard Vial (7 min)

Bisard was accused of drunk driving while on duty in August 2010 resulting in a fatality however IMPD did not take him to the proper medical facility for a blood draw so the evidence was not allowed.

It’s pretty much a foregone conclusion that the Indianapolis City-County Council tonight will pass an amended smoking ban that includes bars and taverns.  And I think it’s fair to say that unless there is some hidden ticking time bomb in the measure, Mayor Greg Ballard will sign it.  So when it is all said and done the only places where smoking will be allowed are private clubs, OTBs, and cigar and hookah bars.  So when advocates declare their victory I hope they go celebrate at one of those bars that were formerly smoking but now have to go non-smoking.

I say this because I can already see a few places in town that have been struggling to stay open in this economy now getting pushed out of business because the people who would come out and smoke when they drink now just stay home.   Now I do believe this is the part where the advocates come out and say “there is no net loss of business in communities where smoking bans have been in place.”   The key word there is “net”.   That means some places will gain business and others will to lose business, which means those workers that everyone talks about (many of whom smoke) will now have cleaner lungs and healthier bodies.  That’s good because they are going to need it as they look for another job.   But at least they won’t be exposed to secondhand smoke.  They may not eat or be able to pay rent or make their car payments, but at least they have their health.

Yes, I am being a bit facetious here.   Most of us cigar smokers are.  But the more important thing is one of the arguments have been made since Indianapolis first started debating a smoking ban in 2005 was whether local places would lose business?   Frankly, I think the free market system of choice has been working just fine for workers, owners and patrons.  However, after tonight we will live in a different world.   So with that being said, I hope the advocates that have been pushing this will run out and celebrate and continue to do so in places that used to be smoking.  Better yet, I am sure they’ll also be contacting those bar owners and asking them how Smoke Free Indy and other such groups can help those businesses with promotions and getting new customers in the door.  I figure it’s the least they could do.

Because if it’s true that nobody has ever gone out of business because of a smoking ban then there is no reason I should be back here in three months writing about the places that took it on the chin because the current compromise just wasn’t enough.

Today I was called, “Barack Obama loving socialist Muslim follower of Louis Farrakhan establishment RINO”.

I didn’t think that was possible.

There is an old saying in politics that if you stick around long enough, you will eventually see just about everything.  I have been writing about the Indianapolis City-County Council for nearly eight years now and I think this year I have finally seen things come full circle, particularly in the area of public safety and the city’s finances.

For example, currently Public Safety Director Frank Straub is up for reappointment by the City Council.  No doubt that Straub is considered controversial in some circles and the Democrats have questioned whether he can serve in the position if a majority of the Council doesn’t sign off on the reappointment.  The law on this is pretty clear, Straub can stay until either he leaves or the Mayor picks a new head of DPS.  Democrats are questioning that now, but they had a different attitude back in December 2010.  At that Council meeting Council member Vern Brown acknowledged during a Q and A with then President Ryan Vaughn that the Council did not have the authority to get rid of Straub, he would still have a job the next day no matter how they voted and if the voters didn’t like it they would take it out on the Mayor in the next election.

Don’t believe me?  That’s fine.  You can see and hear the conversation for yourself.    Here’s the link to that Council meeting on the city’s website.   Councilor Brown’s comments come in at about 44:00 into the meeting.

Now let’s move on to the latest news, what to do to plug an anticipated $34 million budget public safety shortfall?   Some Democrats have suggested using money from the Rebuild Indy fund as a way to fill that gap in public safety.   What’s surprising about that isn’t that it would be using one-time revenue to plug an ongoing expense, which is considered to be really bad fiscal management, but my Democratic friends threw a fit a couple years back during the debate over the transfer of the water company to Citizens Energy Group.  The city received $425 million from Citizens which was used primarily for street and sidewalk repair and to tear down abandoned homes.   The Ballard administration also used part of the proceeds for the Fiscal Stability Fund so the city could keep its high credit rating which makes it easier to float bonds at a lower interest rate.  They also used part of it to start an education incubator to turn Indianapolis into the Silicon Valley of education reform. But even then Democrats cried foul that money from the water company would be diverted to other purposes.

Still don’t believe me? Guess what, I have another clip for you. This is from the July 27 City-County Council meeting. Democratic Councilor Monroe Gray goes on about using $100,000 annually from the $425,000,000 for the Council to monitor complaints about the water transfer and sending any surplus appropriation to the general fund. They come about an hour and 13 minutes into the meeting.  And that was just over spending $100,000.  I don’t mind my Democratic friends expressing their opinions on issues of the day, I just wish they would be more consistent. Or at the very least make sure there aren’t any recordings lying around.

Both incumbent U.S. Senator Richard Lugar and Republican primary challenger Richard Mourdock declared victory in tonight’s GOP debate.

In the debate sponsored by the Indiana Debate Commission and broadcast all over the state incumbent Richard Lugar and challenger State Treasurer Richard Mourdock both said felt the debate put the campaign momentum in their direction.

The two men touched on jobs, energy and foreign policy.  While agreed for the most part with each other they split over ethanol and when America should go it alone with its foreign policy.

You can view the entire debate at the Indiana Debate Commission’s website.

The two candidates spoke to media for approximately 10 minutes following the debate.  Indy Politics has embedded those interviews below in the order in which they occurred.

Leon-Tailored Interview: Richard Mourdock

Leon-Tailored Interview: Richard Lugar

A recent poll by Howey Politics Indiana and DePauw University gave Lugar a seven point lead over Mourdock, 42-35, but more than 20% of the voters were still undecided in the race.