Computer shouldn’t have been removed
Fayette County District Attorney Nancy D. Vernon has concluded there is no evidence of wrongdoing in an examination of three computers in the county controllers’ office. She has asserted that neither outgoing Controller Mark Roberts nor incoming Controller Sean P. Lally took action to alter or delete any computer information. Roberts is crowing that Vernon’s determination has vindicated him, proving that he did nothing wrong, while at the same time getting a jab in at Lally by saying, “My reputation has been tarnished, and will never be repaired, all based on the accusations of a bitter political opponent.”
Yet it was Roberts who contended that Lally was in his office the Friday a computer broke down – which contradicts Vernon’s official finding that, “Lally did not enter into the controller’s office until he took office (the following Monday).” Because of that singular fact, we don’t find it surprising that Vernon found that “Lally took no action to alter or delete any computer information.” That would have been hard to do unless Lally is skilled at mechanical telepathy.
None of this excuses the fact that Roberts removed a computer from the office, taking it home over the weekend in a reported attempt to have it repaired after it crashed. That computer was officially county property and should not have been removed under any circumstance.
And what of Vernon’s finding regarding that specific computer? “Due to the condition of the computer, no testing could be performed. It is unusable and incapable of retaining any information,” she reports.
Roberts says he took the computer home to try to repair it himself. If the computer had crashed beyond repair, why would he be so concerned about trying to fix it, especially in the last 48 hours of his eight years in office? When did Roberts become a qualified computer repairman anyway?
Commissioner Angela M. Zimmerlink says the commissioners, as stewards of county property, have written policies in place. But she notes that “words mean nothing if enforcement is ignored.”
Here’s the main point: The computer never should have left the courthouse in the first place.