Dennis O'Donnell was one smart cookie

Letter #5

I sent this one to Dennis O’Donnell, who regrettably has not yet received the credit he deserves for his skillful management of the Francke murder case cover-up.

Hello Dennis,

You probably don’t remember me but I wrote a whole bunch of columns for the Oregonian over the course of the Michael Francke murder investigation. And golly, if only I’d had a better understanding of what was actually going on back then I might have done a better job of asking you even some half-intelligent questions about it.

Lucky for both of us, though, I’m writing a book about the case now, and this is my chance to ask some of the questions I should have asked then – and yours, as the former State Police captain in charge of the investigation, to answer or elaborate upon them however you wish.

For example, if you’ve been following the case at all, you’ve probably noticed that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has completely exonerated Frank Gable, ruling that every bit of evidence used against him was fabricated by the State Police.

“Investigative misconduct,” is what they called it – which of course is just their polite way of saying that the investigation was crooked – and I know how much you like folksy sounding similes – as a dog’s hind leg. Or to put it as I usually do, it was a railroad job from start to finish.

Not only did the state police manufacture every bit of the evidence against him, but they were aware early on that he had an airtight alibi for the night of the murder. And then they went ahead and railroaded him anyway. You can’t get much dirtier than that.

And so I guess my first question to you – since you were, after all, in charge of that investigation – is whaddya think about that?

That’s the biggie, you know. You basically stand accused, in federal court no less, of being corrupt – or at least of conducting a corrupt investigation – and this is your chance to agree or disagree with that characterization. Please be specific when you do.

Were you aware that your investigators used threats and offers of leniency to persuade the prosecution’s so-called “material witnesses” to make up completely false stories about Gable?

Also, were you aware your investigators knew, early on, that Gable had an air-tight alibi for the night of the murder?

If you weren’t aware, how in the world, considering how clever you obviously are, did they get away with concealing these blatantly corrupt acts from you? Were you taking too many naps?

And if you were aware, how do you sleep at night knowing you deliberately sent an innocent man to prison for life in order to cover up the murder of a high-ranking law enforcement official who was about to expose the corruption he’d discovered in Corrections?

And while we’re at it, I’d also like to give you a chance to respond to reports from two former, let’s say, associates of yours from your days as a narcotics cop in Lane County. They have this wild tale about a career criminal named Steven Harry Daniels, who they say was cooking meth in a trailer outside Springfield, and then under official auspices, the meth was smuggled into the penitentiary.

According the same sources, this same Steven Harry Daniels, who you knew as Coyote, somehow ended up as a convict working in the OSP superintendent’s office, where, using the state’s computer, he continued to conduct a thriving meth business outside the prison walls. How is this even possible?

Of course what we’re talking about here may be just another clever scheme of yours to entrap some nasty prison drug dealers, and good on you if it was. As we both know, it’s sometimes necessary to cut a few corners when it comes to narcotics enforcement. But if that’s the case, why weren’t there ever any arrests?

In any case, it’s great to be back in touch. And considering the fact that you and a whole raft of your State Police colleagues are currently being sued for millions of dollars for violating Gable’s civil rights, I’ll understand if you don’t feel comfortable responding to my questions about the investigation itself right now.

However, the stuff about Steven Harry Daniels sounds like it would be fun to kick around a bit. And since both informants say that Daniels was one of your snitches, you’d probably be the one to explain what was actually going on there.

As always,

Phil Stanford