[What follows is the opening statement made by Bill Lueders before the Madison Police and Fire Commission on Oct. 15, 1998.]

Like it or not, we are a society of rules. We set expectations for behavior, and proscribe consequences when these are violated. This is why we have police departments, to enforce the rules we have established. To this end, police have tremendous power--the power to arrest, to detain, to question, to use deadly force. Because the police have so much power, it makes sense that police departments have their own set of rules governing how officers and supervisors are expected to behave.

Madison Police Department rules require that officers "tell the truth at all times and under all circumstances, whether under oath or otherwise." This rule means that Lt. Dennis George Riley was required to tell the truth to me when I called him in early February of this year and asked him about letters he had received from a Madison woman named Patty alleging that two detectives had coerced her into recanting a reported rape.

Lt. Riley told me that he did not know what I was talking about. He said he didn’t remember Patty’s letters, even after I read them aloud to him. Was he lying?

I intend to show that Lt. Riley knew about these letters before I called, and he knew about them afterwards. I think it's reasonable to conclude he knew about them during this call as well.

Why? Because, first of all, these are not the kind of letters an ordinary person--let alone a police supervisor--is likely to forget. They allege that detectives under Lt. Riley’s supervision and perhaps acting at his direction lied to and pressured a rape victim into recanting a reported assault. Madison Police Department rules require officers and especially supervisors to make certain judgments and to take certain steps with regard to communications that could be considered complaints. Lt. Riley, as I understand it, did take some of these steps. He consulted with at least two individuals before deciding not to refer these letters to the Professional Standards Unit. Both of them later remembered Patty's letters in detail.

Moreover, just days before my call, Lt, Riley purportedly had detailed discussions about this case with two health professionals, Jill Poarch and Colleen O'Brien at Meriter Hospital, whom I had contacted regarding Patty's allegations. He discussed the history of the case with them, in response to concerns I had raised. These concerns were the same as those in Patty's letters, which Riley had read and discussed with others.

Yet, when I asked Lt. Riley about Patty’s letters, he claims to have drawn a complete blank. Was he lying? I think he was. Why? To avoid accountability for his role in this case. And it may have worked. At the time, I didn’t know for sure that Lt. Riley had received these letters. It was only because of Lt. Pat Malloy's honesty that I learned the truth.

The likelihood that Lt. Riley lied when he claimed to have no knowledge of Patty's letters is underscored by the actions he took immediately afterwards. He initiated a series of contacts in an attempt to control the damage. He called Lt. Malloy, head of Professional Standards, and told him about my call. He spoke to Det. Woodmansee, and located a copy of the letters he had received earlier. Lt. Riley then spoke to Asst. Chiefs Ted Ballistreri and Richard Cowan and to Chief Richard Williams to inform them of the call he had gotten from me, the response he made to me, and his subsequent "recovery" of Patty’s letters. Lt. Riley knew he had given me false information, and, while he tried to cover his tracks, he never tried to set the record straight.

Apparently, it was only then, after I caught Lt. Riley lying, that these letters from Patty were provided to the Dane County District Attorney's Office. It was only then that the office learned that Patty had tried to complain about the detectives who coerced her confession--information that should have been forwarded in a timely fashion.

Lt. Riley's peers will affirm that he is a good and distinguished officer. I don’t dispute that. But I believe Lt. Riley did lie to me. He told me something that wasn’t true in order to cover his involvement in an investigation in which a lot of untrue things were said, and a lot of rules were broken. I urge you to hold him accountable.