If you read Hank Sims’ January 3rd Town Dandy column, you likely raised brows at the last sentence, which casts doubt on Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass’ version of events the night he was allegedly shoved by lollapazillionaire Rob Arkley.
Sims recounts a recent phone call from Glass after the North Coast Journal published its “Top Ten Stories of 2007,” in which Sims reported — falsely, according to Glass — that the Councilman “changed his mind” when he decided to press charges against Arkley. Glass maintains his mind was never made up.
The rest of the article takes us on a journey of Google searches and phone calls in which Sims tries to ascertain whether Glass, in fact, “changed his mind.” After all, the uber-powerful internet or perhaps the all-knowing Times-Standard editor Rich Somerville must have the power to delve into the Councilman’s thought processes and deliver us from evil.
In the end, Sims pontificates:
I’d guess that this small little bit of uncertainty will join all the other, larger, stranger bits of uncertainty attached to that night that Rob Arkley got aggro on Larry Glass, shoving him or not shoving him, threatening to destroy him (or not), all in front of a roomful of society people who carefully and fastidiously failed to witness any of it.
With these words, Sims seems to forget his first report of the notorious incident in which he quoted Marshall Spalding, manager of the Courthouse Market, saying of the shove, “it did happen, we all know it happened.” Sims boosts Marshall’s credibility in the matter by noting he’s “no ideological opponent of Arkley” who “wouldn’t give names of his eyewitnesses, but he wasn’t afraid to go on the record himself.”
Now, however, Sims declares that “a roomful of society people… carefully and fastidiously failed to witness any of it.” How does he know? Has he seen the EPD report now languishing in the office of the Attorney General? Or did he use the extra-sensory powers of Google?
Whatever the answer, one thing seems clear: Sims dislikes having his reporting — or mind reading — refuted and his dig on Glass appears to be the payback.
Luckily, Glass never learned to beware those who buy ink by the barrel. But at least Sims acknowledged the “very unlikely[hood]” that Glass is lying about the contents of his own mind.

January 7, 2008 at 12:32 am
This is yet another example of Hanks bipolar writing style. Sometimes on top of his game (Very rare the last 4 years), sometimes outright lazy and mostly mediocre. This is outright ridiculous. Firstly the whole topic is beyond lame, yet Hank goes to town over a damn phone call. If Hanks aim was to defend what honor he has left, it backfired. This is a man who shamelessly inserts his opinion into every single piece he does.
With Hank at the helm of “The Journal” we have seen that once noble rag become more akin to “The Globe” “The Sun” “The National Enquirer” and every other trite rag where the staffs ego has overtaken the duty to the community.
What a lame hack.
January 7, 2008 at 2:09 am
Why didn’t Hank listen to the KHUM interview again? That would have settled the issue.
January 7, 2008 at 6:50 am
I disliked the Dandy column personally and think Hank might have crossed a journalistic line when he skewered Larry for taking the time to try to clarify a thought process only Larry was privy to. But I did not read that last sentence the way Heraldo did. I thought Hank was taking a jab at the dozens of bigwigs in the room too chickenshit to tell the truth about what they witnessed that night. I don’ see any other way of reading “carefully and fastidiously.” Those are deliberate terms suggesting, I think, that a room full of Humboldt County glitterati are deliberately concealing what they know.
And if I remember correctly, the Eureka Reporter also did a story about Larry’s decision to pursue charges and reported it the way Larry said it happened, as the completion, rather than the reversal, of his decision-making process. Do we have access to that story, or are the ER archives still inaccessible?
January 7, 2008 at 7:10 am
As I understood the situation, there were witnesses that reported to the police and not to the press.
January 7, 2008 at 7:11 am
Attorney General investigations can take a long time. Whatever happens with the legal action, Larry is setting the right example for office-holders and school kids alike:
Stand up to bullies.
It’s the only way to show them what is up. Larry has courage and is showing leadership with his example. The people of Eureka did right, electing Larry Glass to City Council!
January 7, 2008 at 7:14 am
I saw Larry at Avalon a couple of weeks back, and the Avalon staff looked more than uncomfortable, to say the least
January 7, 2008 at 7:54 am
That’s right, stand up to bullies like Glass who lie to make their point.
January 7, 2008 at 8:40 am
I see your point, Anon. It would have been more clear if he’d clarified that none of them would talk to the media about what they saw. What any of them told investigators has not been released to the public.
January 7, 2008 at 9:17 am
I’m pretty sure Larry said he wouldn’t pursue the matter when he was interviewed on KHUM. Anyone have the audio link?
January 7, 2008 at 9:23 am
The audio is here.
January 7, 2008 at 9:30 am
Mike Dronkers: Are you going to press charges?
Larry Glass: The city attorney has recommended I file a police report which is what I’m going to do.
January 7, 2008 at 9:39 am
Precisely what I was going to quote Heraldo. The entire tone of the interview is that Larry is alarmed, but he doesn’t say he will press charges. When specifically asked about pressing charges, he says he will file a police report (that’s not pressing charges) due to concerns for his own future safety, purely to document the incident. I totally support Mr. Dandy’s version of events.
My impression is that AFTER the KHUM interview, AFTER people started talking about the incident in terms of a councilmember being threatened in relation to a council vote, THEN Larry decided to take things up a notch.
I support Larry’s version of events, but it’s disingenuous to imply Larry was always thinking about filing charges. His public comments imply exactly the opposite, as the KHUM interview demonstrates.
January 7, 2008 at 9:41 am
(When I say “I support Larry’s version of events” I mean what happened in the shoving incident, not the revisionist history about his thought process being deployed now.)
January 7, 2008 at 9:43 am
I agree with 9:39 – Glass was very clear that he was only filing a report to get it on the record in case anything happened in the future.
What happened to Larry after that – and why he changed his mind – is anybody’s guess. And there are lots of guesses.
January 7, 2008 at 9:46 am
He didn’t say he wasn’t going to press charges, and I’m sure the possibility was on his mind in the days that followed the incident. Wouldn’t they be on your mind?
He said in the interview that he dealt with the immediate threat while it was happening. If someone is shoving and threatening to destroy you, it’s unlikely you have your next few days immediately planned out.
I didn’t hear anything in the interview that suggested he wouldn’t press charges.
January 7, 2008 at 9:48 am
Just like your guess about what was in Larry’s mind. Nice crystal ball you got there.
January 7, 2008 at 9:50 am
No need for a crystal ball. Larry was directly asked in the KHUM interview about pressing charges. You can’t spin that one Heraldo. You linked to the audio yourself. Maybe you were confused by what a police report means.
Larry changed his mind after people started talking about the incident in terms of the entire council essentially being shoved.
January 7, 2008 at 9:53 am
It’s the first step to pressing charges.
January 7, 2008 at 9:54 am
It’s the only step he was considering, per Larry’s own words, captured in the MP3 file. He talked AT LENGTH about the issue, and his reasoning for filing the report.
January 7, 2008 at 9:56 am
Why would Larry hide the truth during the KHUM interview if he was truly considering filing charges? Why would Larry deceive the public? Because he wasn’t deceiving. He was being honest when he said he was only interested in filing the police report, not pressing charges. Please don’t imply Larry was lying to us Heraldo.
January 7, 2008 at 10:01 am
I’m obviously not implying Larry was lying. That interview happened about 14 hours after the incident. There’s no rule that says you have to know exactly how you’re going to deal with a situation the moment it happens.
To take an extreme example, if you have a family member killed by the police, you have six months to file a claim with the city and an additional six months to file a lawsuit.
Larry did not say he was only interested in filing a police report. You are keen to put words in his mouth.
January 7, 2008 at 10:03 am
“I didn’t hear anything in the interview that suggested he wouldn’t press charges.”
If you’ll all remember Larry was headed down to Sacramento for city business in which he had intended to discuss the matter further with the city attorney and staff ,and proceed from there.He never ruled out filing charges.I talked with the following morning about it as well.He said that if he would receive a true apology and felt certain that the incident was a one time thing and just a blowup he would consider NOT filing charges and let the matter rest,and would only file a police report to document the incident.
January 7, 2008 at 10:04 am
I talked with him the following morning about it as well.
January 7, 2008 at 10:06 am
And yet Larry was asked specifically about pressing charges on KHUM and never even mentioned the idea he was considering the option. How very perplexing, or not.
January 7, 2008 at 10:08 am
Thanks for half-way admitting Larry did not say he was only interested in filing a police report.
January 7, 2008 at 10:09 am
In short, Hank got it right. The issue isn’t crystal clear as Heraldo makes it out to be.
January 7, 2008 at 10:12 am
Yeah, you’re right Heraldo. Larry just talked at length about everything except pressing charges and one thing he was going to do (file a report) even though he was specifically asked about pressing charges. Do you realize how silly you sound? I’m done. If this wasn’t your own blog, I’d consider you a troll. I don’t believe you really believe what you’re saying Heraldo. This is all a political game for you, which means it’s a waste of my time to be bantering with you. Facts are irrelevant here. Cya.
January 7, 2008 at 10:16 am
Larry has gone on record several times, including Sims’ piece, saying that after attending a State convention of city council members (which happened to immediately follow the date of the incident, Sept. 5), and consulting with numerous of his elected peers, decided to file charges. He indicated that his perspective on the nature of the incident was informed by input from other elected officials, in essence that the incident was not something to be taken as lightly as he had been taking it.
And I believe he did the right thing.
January 7, 2008 at 10:33 am
I saw Larry at Avalon a couple of weeks back, and the Avalon staff looked more than uncomfortable, to say the least
Why? Did Arkley have a reservation?
January 7, 2008 at 11:01 am
“Why? Did Arkley have a reservation?”
- I don’t think the staff appreciated the accusations
January 7, 2008 at 11:03 am
Or they didn’t appreciate being threatened with job loss if they reported what they saw.
January 7, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Larry filed because the anti-Arkley people wanted a cause to fire up their supporters in the next election cycle. They have not gotten over losing those city council races and want to win a majority the next time.
January 7, 2008 at 12:05 pm
why would the avalon staff not appreciate accusations made at arkley?? please elaborate on that thought…….
January 7, 2008 at 12:17 pm
The bigger question – why would anyone go to Avalon when there are any number of places with better food and atmosphere? If I wanted to feel like I was in the bay area, I’d go the the freaking Bay area.
But I digress. Why do ya’ll act surprised that Larry’s feelings on the event seem to evolve over time? How often is you first reaction the best or final course of action?
As far as Avalon staff, why wouldn’t they be uncomfortable with him in there, at least until it became “normal” again.
Yeah, I suppose I’m anti-Arkley, if for no other reason than the idea of the fat guy throwing his weight around pisses me off. A philanthropist he is not. If he has an altruistic bone in his body, it’s hidden under several layers of greasy greed and lust for control.
January 7, 2008 at 12:30 pm
12 pm, that is utter bullshit. Glass filed because it was the right thing to do, period.
January 7, 2008 at 12:30 pm
…though it would be nice to think the Anti-Arkleyville crowd had it together that well.
January 7, 2008 at 1:20 pm
There are only a few main anti-Arkley players – Salzman, Dr. Ken, etc. THEY have it together very well. The rest are sympathetic to the cause. I know for a fact Salman et al were on the phone pressing Larry to file charges. This info comes from a person I trust completely. While Larry is his own man, if their agenda coincides with his, he is a whore like ay other politician.
January 7, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Well that proves that the Heraldo is female rumor is false.
January 7, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Larry told me that he doesn’t know who Heraldo is, and for that matter, neither do I. Besides, that has nothing to do with it.
Average Eurekan has it correct.
January 7, 2008 at 1:41 pm
This is so petty and pointless. Hank writes drivel about Larry clarifying something. This is something that is always handled behind the scenes with professionals. The problem is Sims is anything but professional. I put this down as Hank simply trying yet again to become part of the story.
The very fact Hank was googling other journalists work shows how lazy and incompetent he is. He can’t even verify why he says what he says. Hanks ego sure has exposed him as a hack on this one! LOL!
January 7, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Is this seriously what passes for journalism in Humboldt County?
More like tabloid filth.
This whole media obsession with this story, especially Sims obsession, exposes these people as tabloid filth mongers.
Hank, you couldn’t dust Bret Harte’s shoes!
But you have a promising future writing for Joan Rivers!
January 7, 2008 at 2:07 pm
What do you suppose The Destroyer is worth these days?
January 7, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
January 7, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Average Eurekan at 10:17 has it correct. Sims. either because he was too lazy to write a credible story just makes it up as he goes along. Maybe Wendy Butler can find a home there….her writing suffers sometimes from the same disease.
January 7, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Or maybe Hank is out to get her old job.
January 7, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Larry couldn’t change his mind if he hadn’t made up his mind yet. Filing a police report is not necessary if one is not going to press charges. By doing so, he kept open the possibility that he could still press charges. Reading the text of the KHUM interview, it is clear that Larry did not specifically rule out pressing charges, so I don’t see how anyone can say he ‘changed his mind.’
January 7, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Peace be with you.
“Well that proves that the Heraldo is female rumor is false.”
Not if the rumor that Glass is a male is wrong. Anyone check?
love eternal
tad
January 7, 2008 at 3:52 pm
A couple months ago Hank got hammered for his anti anonymous rantings, specifically because his business is dependent upon anonymous sources. Many whistle blowers are subject to this irrational madman. Now we learn if you try to clean up his clumsy writing, you might just be featured in one of Hanks cute stories and all but called a liar. I would trust the folks at the Times-Standard or Eureka Reporter over this nutjob any day.
January 7, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Love the “society people” nametag. That is completely hysterical. If having a job, and eating nice food, socializing at a local business get together makes us all “society people”- way’ell, alll be darrnnned! Thanks for such a compliment… Or was that a slam?! Hey! It wuz! HANK, that’s kinda mean!
January 7, 2008 at 5:19 pm
This is something that is always handled behind the scenes with professionals. That’s what they said when Salzman got caught writing phony letters. Why should it be hidden behind the scenes? Larry’s chance to have anything about “the shove” kept quietly “behind the scenes” was forfeited when he chose to make a federal case about it. It’s now with the State Attorney General for God’s sake.
January 7, 2008 at 5:29 pm
OK, now that you’ve all gotten that out of your systems…
I’m grateful to 6:50 a.m. for correcting Ms. Heraldo’s club-footed reading skills. As should be apparent to anyone whose literacy has advanced beyond the sixth-grade level, the column was not a slam on Larry Glass or anyone.
I had a request for a correction. I did my best to fulfill it. I failed. It turns out that the question probably unanswerable, because the two parties in the matter — Larry Glass and the Times-Standard — disagree on the facts. But I reported what I learned in my little investigation of the matter because I owed it to my readers and to Glass.
With that, I think there’s only two substantive points to address.
Quite obviously, no. Corrections to facts that have appeared in the paper are not “handled behind the scenes.” I work for my readers. If I’ve given them an incorrect impression in a story, then I owe it to them to correct that fact.
If I “handle it behind the scenes,” as you so oleaginously propose, then I’ve left my readers in the dark, haven’t I? That’s not really what a newspaper is supposed to do, is it? And then I wouldn’t really fulfill Glass’ request to me either, would I?
In this case, I couldn’t either prove the fact or correct it. So I just said what I knew to be true.
Reading the text of the KHUM interview, it is clear that Larry did not specifically rule out pressing charges, so I don’t see how anyone can say he ‘changed his mind.’
Right, but that’s not the issue. The issue is that on the day after the KHUM interview the Times-Standard had him down this way:
That’s the paragraph that stuck in people’s minds. Is it correct or not? Is it properly sourced? I don’t know. The Times-Standard says it is. Larry Glass says it isn’t. So I can’t really give Larry Glass the correction he asked for, because I don’t know. I can only point out that the facts are in dispute. Which is what I did.
I think that most of the confusion over here comes from the fact that this is a dispute between the Times-Standard and Larry Glass. In Heraldoworld, they’re both good guys. Confusing! Who can we be angry at?
January 7, 2008 at 5:42 pm
pick me! pick me!
January 7, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Dang….good word Hank. I think obstreperously would be a better choice. But hell, I’m just showing off. The same thing might apply to more than a few of the zealots on this thread.
Now let’s get to the real issue.
What about the “fastidiously” part…or was that uberjournalopoetry?
But, thanks for the glimpse into your thought process on this.
Ever dependent on my magic 8 ball as an oracle, I get “Ask again later.”
What does yours reveal?
January 7, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Unctuous, oily. Also very insincere and fawning, the quality of a suck-up….
v
Noisily and stubbornly defiant….
hmmmm.
“Ms. heraldo,” Hank?
January 7, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Ok Rose:
Both apply. Just depends on which troll you wish to choose.
Olive oil to be precise. But the 8-ball says “Count on it”
Hmmmmm2u2
Now, what about the fastidious part?
January 7, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Could be Olive Oyl
I yam what I yam.
I would quote the 8 ball again….but this is pretty serious stuff.
Now back to fastidious…
January 7, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Hank, corrections aren’t exactly expounded on in the editors fruity little ‘Dandy’ section either. Admit it, you are trumping this up because, like other tabloid filth, you think you’re going to get more readers by keeping this story alive. So instead of putting a short two sentence piece in, or letting it go (And I DO think professionals would in this case, because its tabloid trash) you throw fuel on the fire. What was the point? We don’t know what happened? Thanks Hank. I wasn’t aware that talking to one of you hacks was like being sworn in at court. Perhaps you could get a stenographer? It’s obvious you need one Sims.
January 7, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Possessing or displaying careful, meticulous attention to detail. Difficult to please; exacting. Excessively scrupulous or sensitive, especially in matters of taste or….
January 7, 2008 at 8:48 pm
“Possessing or displaying careful, meticulous attention to detail. Difficult to please; exacting. Excessively scrupulous or sensitive, especially in matters of taste or….” Filth?
Oh Rose
Exactly my point,
Just wondered why Hank chose that particular word?
January 7, 2008 at 9:08 pm
January 7, 2008 at 9:17 pm
so much for the magic 8 ball then
Sleep well
January 8, 2008 at 11:18 am
I hereby pronounce this thread “dead.”
January 8, 2008 at 4:34 pm
There was a confrontation we know at Avalon. This type of thing does not happen to most people, so they may not know right away how to deal with it.
We know Larry said something that night to the police chief.
Then you have Randy Ganns who was there with his boss, who it seems had too much to drink. Randy came out publicly and said there was no physical contact.
It will be interesting to see if there will be information in the Police report that shows if there was physical contact.
If I was Larry and heard that Randy, the Vice President of Real Estate for Security National, and his boss Brian Morrisey, had said there was no physical contact when there was, at that point the right thing to do would be to file charges.
If there was physical contact it will leave Randy Ganns and Brian Morrisey both in a very bad light.
It would seem hard in the future for our City officials, and we as a public, to trust any information that came from Randy or Brian.
On this, only time will tell.
January 8, 2008 at 5:22 pm
or information that came from Larry, etc.
and I believe it’s “Gans”.
January 9, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Who actually believes anything Gans or Morrisey have said anyway?
I’d say from most Eurekans’ perspectives, not much credibility to be lost there.
January 9, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Guilty unless proven innocent. Amazing. And this from the “justice for all” crowd.
January 9, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Sometimes justice comes with a reputation earned.
January 9, 2008 at 9:48 pm
So true yer honor
and sometimes a reputation comes with injustice
and “uhhhm” is not an answer
January 30, 2008 at 6:06 pm
i do read minds and it is a total pain.