Stay in the know! Sign up to get Fauquier County news updates delivered to your inbox.
Advertise on Fauquier Now!
Since the election, have you tried to improve relationships with those who have different political views? Vote!
Free classifieds! Members can also post calendar events, news, opinions and more ... all for free! Register now!
Login · Forgot Your Password?
August 19, 2015 · OPINION

Mosier very qualified to run Fauquier sheriff’s office

Bob Mosier
By Matthew Johnston

As a lifelong resident of Fauquier County, I have a vested interest in the quality of our local law enforcement. However, I don’t typically get involved with or endorse one candidate or another.

But, when I discovered Bob Mosier was running for sheriff, my interest was piqued. I have known of Bob for many years through my family but really didn’t have any direct knowledge of him or his political standpoint. I’m not one to cast a vote for someone simply because my friends or family recommend them. But this inspired me to do some independent research. What I found has convinced me beyond all doubt that Bob Mosier is the man for the job.

First off, I was very displeased to find out that Fauquier County was not accredited by the Virginia Law Enforcement Professional Standards Commission — especially considering nearly every surrounding county was accredited. This accreditation, or the lack thereof, is a direct reflection of the quality and standards by which a law enforcement agency is measured. Personally, I feel this should be a top priority for our sheriff. The peace of mind this accreditation provides residents of the county cannot be quantified.

Secondly, I looked into Bob’s experience. As a combat veteran of the armed forces myself, I was surprised to find out that Bob spend time in Bosnia and Herzegovina, working with law enforcement. Having spent almost a year there myself helping liberate the Bosnian people from the genocide the Serbians were carrying out against them, I can relate to the challenges Bob had to overcome. I also found out that Bob spent time in Cambodia, assisting the local law enforcement community. Bob truly does have a world of experience he brings to the table.

I then looked into Bob’s experience here in Fauquier County. I ran across an article written in the paper by a county resident. It was a sad story but one in which Bob’s out-of-the-box thinking truly shined. In 1995, a little girl went missing. As a captain in the sheriff’s office, Bob organized the search party. Recognizing that due to weather conditions and the dense vegetation, vehicular and foot patrols wouldn’t be enough. He realized that the search areas could be covered more efficiently by incorporating patrols on horseback. Bob reached out to local horse owners to solicit their assistance in conducting the search. While the story didn’t have a happy ending, Bob’s efforts were unparalleled and showed what a little ingenuity could accomplish.

I can’t rightly document everything I learned about Bob in this short article, but considering all I learned through my research and listening to his vision, it is clear that Bob Mosier truly does have the experience, leadership and commitment that it takes to lead Fauquier County Sheriff’s Office. I am confident that with him behind the helm, our county will have a bright future, with a clear path to state accreditation. Bob will facilitate the change we are so sorely in need of. See you all at the polls. I’ll be proudly wearing a “Vote For Bob” pin!

Member comments
To comment, please log in or register.
Jim Griffin · September 10, 2015 at 11:50 am
PA: I am appreciative for this elevated level of discourse on this topic that you've presented. Nothing I've heard before this has made sense, but you've clearly articulated strong arguments for change. I will do my level best to attend the debate or in the alternative will follow the coverage of it carefully.

Your analysis is much saner than the rumor and innuendo that's been passed around, all of which would make any reasonable person suspicious.

Truly, I thank you.
PoliceAdministrator · September 10, 2015 at 11:31 am
Well ThePlainsman all you had to do was come to the meeting up in Marshall this past Tuesday night to clearly see that Sheriff Fox has not been a leader of our sheriff’s office since day one. He is in way over his head. I don't mean to insult him but it's a fact. I call it like I see it. He has attended only 3 budget meetings in 11 and half years. He has no agenda on what he plans to do and only wants to run on his current record which he claims speaks for itself. I beg to differ.

He has yet to fill two positions of captain and one of major and claims that he put those positions on the street which is simply not true. He claims that he follows the county human resource policies on promotions which are also not true. His chief deputy changed the qualifications so that they could promote those that the wanted in those positions. Two current captains and one former captain were not eligible so the counted their years of service with other departments when in fact they should have counted years of service with Fauquier County. How can Sheriff Fox stand up there and be so dishonest? Where is his integrity? What about those deputies that were jilted by this? No wonder why the morale is at an all-time low since Sheriff Fox took office.

He claims that he can't get positions and money when you talk to him but yet he doesn't apply for grants or even approach the board of supervisors to even ask. Public safety should be his top priority but those actions alone only show that they are not. Citizens want to see deputies in their communities but they don't. Perhaps you should purchase a scanner and listen like I do. Having the closest unit for a call up in the far Northern end of the county coming from Warrenton is unacceptable. Sometimes there are no units up North. Pulling deputies from their duties of protecting the community to work traffic at Fauquier High School is also unacceptable. That section of Waterloo Road is in the town limits. Go buy a scanner and listen for yourself. I hear it all the time. I hear school resource officers marking out for school traffic in the morning when they should be reporting to their schools. I am a parent. I want my school resource officers at the school ready to go on campus before the parents, buses and students arrive. That is a crucial time for them to be there.

You then have deputy Tarr announce that he is going to run for Sheriff and he lets him stay on the job. My reliable sources have told me that both he and deputy Tarr only did this as an agreement in their hopes that deputy Tarr would defeat Mosier in the primary because it would be difficult to defeat Mosier in the regular election. Have our Sheriff and deputy Tarr come forward and tell the truth. Did deputy Tarr have second thoughts? I'm sorry but I just can't have people serving this community with no integrity. I want the truth from both of them.

I listened closely to Mosier on Tuesday night. He has a plan. He wants leadership. He wants to run the sheriff’s office the way it should be. He wants to move the sheriff's office forward. I have heard from one of Fox's command staff members that Mosier will spend too much money. I find that to be a desperate scare tactic because Mosier is a threat to them. I don't see Mosier coming in here and going on a spending spree. I see accountability not spending more.

Sheriff Fox at least openly admitted that we have a heroin problem in Fauquier County but yet he and his public relations officer continue to hide all drug arrests made by our deputies.

Sheriff Fox has no plan for the future. He had no plan from the beginning. He defeated Joe Higgs back in 2003 by 198 votes because people wanted change. He was reelected in 2007 because two candidates that ran against him did not campaign. He ran unopposed his third term. He has yet to face a strong candidate and now he has to. People want change. I want change. I want policies for our deputies that protect them and make everything fair. Discipline is selective and inconsistent. Law enforcement accreditation will bring all of the necessary changes to correct this. I want a professional agency with strong leadership and policies that support it. Anything less than that is unacceptable.

There are several more public forums. I plan to attend them all. I suggest that you attend them as well. Don't take my word for it. Go see for yourself that we need a changing of the guard in our sheriff's office. Be a responsible voter. Go get all the facts.
Jim Griffin · September 10, 2015 at 1:40 am
Why would I engage in a debate? I've been clear: I haven't chosen a candidate, so I have neither a side nor an agenda. I've disparaged neither candidate, insisting they are both fine people drawn to public service. I have no questions to answer -- I am trying to get my questions answered.

What seems to infuriate is that I've asked questions about the negative claims made against Fox by the Mosier camp, many of them absurd, depicting a county I do not recognize, replete with innuendo about corruption, rampant speeding, drug planes, and crime that is not borne out by the statistics. Mosier supporters promise in writing there will be motorcycle cops hiding on backroads -- their words -- and I cannot imagine that has the support of our citizens.

Worse still, especially for a law enforcement campaign, is the drumbeat of unwarranted personal suspicion: I must have an agenda, I must represent the sheriff, I must be a Democrat, etc. All poppycock. I am simply a voter curious about this election. No more, no less. Never met either of these candidates, not involved with law enforcement nor have I written or said a bad word about either of them.

I repeat: That anyone thinks I should be called to debate or answer questions is truly crazy because I have no side at all, simply a desire to reconcile the scant information available. That anyone thinks otherwise is a comedy.
Happy to be here · August 26, 2015 at 8:18 pm
sorry for the typo: ask how many drug searches have taken place and if any drugs were ever found......
while you are asking at it find out about that shooting behind Warrenton Lakes-what the deal with that. He has not answered my calls or emails in many years.
Happy to be here · August 26, 2015 at 8:14 pm
All you need to do is ask Sheriff Fox why NO drugs have been found in any high school in Fauquier County in last few years. Ask how many drugs have taken place and if anything was ever found. Just that simple!
Happy to be here · August 26, 2015 at 8:11 pm
I heard that Sheriff Fox just ordered 100 new Glock model 23 Gen 4 .40 caliber pistols and that the Deputies have the opportunity to buy their old Glocks for $150. Can someone ask Charlie if the retirees can get in on that deal also. I got stuck with a Sig 220 in .45 with no nite sights. Or If one of the Deputies wants to trade let me know!
TheLawDawg · August 25, 2015 at 10:22 pm
I support Bob Mosier for Sheriff. As a longtime law enforcement veteran I know from experience he is the man for the job! If you have a question about his qualifications or background, go directly to the source and ask Bob. Don't rely on rumor; become an informed voter!
Pale Rider · August 24, 2015 at 7:17 am
PoliceAdministrator -

It is clear that Plainsman has an agenda here. He refuses to answer any questions, prefer just to pound the table about stats; feels that elected politicians should not be questioned about their failures; and would rather attempt to smear commenters who don't agree with him 100% than answer questions honestly. It would have been nice if he would have been willing to engage in an honest debate instead of making ad hominem attacks against you and I.
PoliceAdministrator · August 23, 2015 at 10:11 pm
I don't feel that Pale Rider, I or anyone is a disgrace to the Mosier campaign. How on earth can anyone not want minimal professional standards through CALEA? It has already been explained to you in great detail but yet you continue to dwell on statistics. Have you ever given thought that statistics can be under reported or even padded to meet someone’s needs? You want to talk about statistics then perhaps you should ask our sheriff why Fauquier has had at least 10 heroin deaths. Where are those statistics? Fauquier is in planning district 9. Fauquier, Culpeper, Madison, Rappahannock and Orange counties are in that planning district. The Blue Ridge narcotics and gang task force serves those counties. Fauquier County leads in the number of heroin deaths but yet you don't see it in the paper. You don't even see the increased number of drug arrests either. What does Sheriff Fox have to hide? The answer is very simple. He doesn't want anyone to know about any of it because he wants you to believe that Fauquier County doesn't have drug problem or even a gang problem. The deputies know what is out there. My reliable source has stated that the sheriff and his public relations officer have told the deputies to keep their mouths shut to the public on both because Bob Mosier has stated that he will take on the serious escalating drug problem and gang activity in the community. Now is that a true leader? I say not. Instead Sheriff Fox has his head buried in the sand and continues to misinform the citizens. Let the deputies speak. They can enlighten you on the truth ThePlainsman. I suggest that you contact Chief Tom Billington. He will reiterate the increased number of heroin overdose EMS calls for service. I got that information first hand from a member of his personnel.

Heroin deaths by overdose have quadrupled from 2002-2013. Why? Lower cost and the increase of prescription opiate pain killers. Also note that when the Feds made Oxycontin/Oxycondone tablets where they could not be crushed so drug users turned to Opana. With stricter regulations doctors just can't write prescriptions like they used to so a good number of users have now turned to heroin because it is cheap. As little as $10 a hit. So I ask why our sheriff has yet to produce the deaths and overdoses. His deputies take the reports. His deputies make the arrests but yet you don't see them. Sheriff Fox is hiding it. The public has the right to know. They need to know. There is no excuse for not informing the public. Drug arrests in Fauquier County have increased because there is more dope out on the streets. The deputies will tell you that they are seeing it more than ever.

It all starts at the top with Sheriff Fox and trickles down to the rest of his administration. Poor management at the top has trickled down and will continue to do so as long as he is at the top. I want leadership. I want ethics and standards. Again our deputies want the leadership that they have not had. Sheriff Fox has had what I would call a free ride with no strong competition. He ran with no opposition during his first re-election and two unknown candidates didn't get out there and make themselves known. Now we have a more than qualified candidate with experience and education that I want leading the fine men and women of our sheriff's office. If you can't comprehend that is your prerogative. You throw statistics out. I want a well rounded individual from all sides. Perhaps you should look at it from every perspective.

I had never met either before this summer when I spoke with both of them within a few weeks apart not mentioning that I was a management level law enforcement officer. Their responses to my questions were thousands and thousands of miles apart with Bob Mosier being the clear choice to be the sheriff of Fauquier County. I'm sorry but we don't need another 4 year term of what we have endured. It would only be a continuation of the first 3 terms. It's time for change.
Jim Griffin · August 23, 2015 at 4:45 pm
The comparison was to local counties, all were worse than Fauquier. Fauquier was the best, and by a wide margin. You said it was a trend that benefited all and that was untrue, simply false, like so much of this sniping about drug planes, corruption, Panamanian trucks and the claim that we need motorcycle cops hiding on back roads. The numbers speak louder than your words.

Shame on Deputy Arrington for speeding. Let those without speeding tickets cast the first stone.

The First Amendment and electioneering at polls -- just silly. Many states have restrictions as did Virginia, and Virginia still does have restrictions on campaigning at polling places.

I truly believe you and others have disgraced Mosier's campaign, but I remain open-minded and will look for whatever evidence and facts arise to distinguish them from one another. Never met either of them, don't know anyone associated with either campaign, but am repulsed by the defamatory attack on a sitting sheriff who has apparently performed well.

I think these are two very good people drawn to public service. If I felt any urgency from either evidence or a gut feeling that we are unsafe in this county I'd feel differently. These crazy accusations, including some I know for a fact are false (because they relate to me), do not sit well and are especially unbefitting a law enforcement campaign.
Pale Rider · August 23, 2015 at 4:34 pm
Theplainsman -

And if Mr. Mosier should be held accountable for everything that is done on behalf of his campaign, maybe Charlie Fox should be held account for his deputies:

Deputy James Arrington was caught speeding on his day off. Should Fox held accountable for his staff?
Pale Rider · August 23, 2015 at 4:31 pm
ThePlainsman - No campaigning at the polls? Why even have the First Amendment? Fortunately, the Legislature and the Department of Elections don't agree with you.

And, yes, please continue to pound your table of "only look at stats, only compare them to counties that have done worse, and ignore the authors of the study that warn to not compare stats between counties." I am sure if you pound long enough, people will listen. Don't look behind the curtain...

And you can call me a "known lier" all you want. I am not sure how you can do so as we have never met, but go for it. And Charlie Fox deserves better than what? How about the families of the six or seven unsolved murders in Fauquier County? Don't they deserve better than they have gotten? And calling you one of his supporters? That is my opinion. I think that you are supporting Charlie. I think you are in the bank for Fox and playing coy. One only has to read this thread and see that is the case. And you were the one who called out the author of this piece for doing something illegal, which was a lie. You tried to disparage him and didn't even apologize when you were caught. Nice.

Jim Griffin · August 23, 2015 at 11:43 am
Oh, Pale Rider, before you go off about my calling you a known liar, it's a fact I personally know and can confirm: I've never met anyone from the sheriff's campaign, don't know him, have never given them any money, and haven't made up my mind about it save for this: It's a rotten campaign of lies being run against the sheriff and he deserves better (as does his opposition, Mosier, who shouldn't be saddled with this baggage). I know for a fact you are lying when you call me one of his supporters. You've lied about it several times, just like so much else that has shown up in the claims made against the sheriff.
Jim Griffin · August 23, 2015 at 11:24 am
Objective timely simple facts:

2003-2012 Violent crime: Fauquier down -51.3%, Loudon down -39.5%, Culpeper down -17.0%, Madison up +167.8%, Rappahannock up +189.6., Prince William down -16.9%, Warren down -31.5%, Page up +9.9%, Orange down -9.7%, Stafford up +12.7%. Average of these: Violent crime was up +21.4% but fell in Fauquier by -51.3%.

2003-2012 Property crime: Fauquier: Down -27.0%, Loudon up +5.2%, Culpeper up +35.2%, Madison up +167.8%, Rappahannock up +29.1%, Prince William down -11.3%, Warren up +4.2%, Page up +5.6%, Orange up +17.9%. Average of these: Property crime was up +5.7% but down in Fauquier by -27.0.

Anything else is table pounding. These are outcomes.
Jim Griffin · August 23, 2015 at 11:13 am
Oh, I must've been wrong about my smiling comment about campaign pins the polling place. Apparently, the law has changed in Virginia, though it remains illegal in other states and I think it should remain illegal in Virginia. No need for campaigning at the polls.
Jim Griffin · August 23, 2015 at 11:06 am
More pounding on the table! Untimely statistics, gang "risk" instead of gang "reality" analysis, all from before Fox was elected, all showing other counties with greater trouble. If it were reality, Fauquier's crime rate would rise for both violent and property crime, but instead Fauquier is the safest county around.

Haven't made up my mind yet, will watch the campaign carefully, waiting for rational, timely thought comparing the candidates, not your ridiculous diatribes.

Your assertion that I am in any way a Fox supporter is an outright lie, which makes you a known liar, like the rest of your foolish nonsense. Never met him, haven't supported him in any way. I do not favor him -- how could I know, never having interacted with him or the justice system in any way? -- but I absolutely oppose the dirty campaign of lies being run against him.

Timely statistics and personal experience make it clear: Fauquier is safe and getting safer. The very latest data shows whatever heroin problem exists in the area is both greater elsewhere and sourced from Baltimore.

Best wishes for your future efforts.
Pale Rider · August 21, 2015 at 1:46 pm
ThePlainsman- I did decide to look into the heroin issue a bit:

Heroin & Overdose Deaths by Year

Commonwealth’s Attorneys report of accidental overdose deaths by year shows that while deaths declined in 2011 and 2012 they have begun to increase in the last two years.



Pale Rider · August 21, 2015 at 12:48 pm
My bad, gangs aren't a problem at all in Fauquier:

"The average index is 7.0. Regions with actual per capita numbers (see left) that are below the Gang Risk Index have lower than expected gang activity, while regions with actual per capita numbers that are above the Gang Risk Index have higher than expected gang activity."

Fauquier index is 15.

:*The Estimated Gang Risk Index uses multivariate regression to estimate the number of gangs per 10,000 people that is typical for regions with similar demographic, socio-economic, and geographic characteristics. The higher the number, the greater the gang risk. Gang risk is usually associated with the following regional characteristics:

1)increasing gang presence over the last several years
2) existence of gangs already in region
3) number of single-parent families, and
4) high proportions of youth and young adults
Pale Rider · August 21, 2015 at 12:35 pm
ThePlainsman - Wrong again 😊

State Board of Elections Policy 2009-002

A meeting of the Virginia State Board of Elections was held on June 25, 2009 whereby a policy was proposed and approved by the Board:

Definition of “exhibit other campaign material”

RESOLVED, by the State Board of Elections under its authority to issue rules and regulations to promote the proper administration of election laws and obtain uniformity in the administration of elections pursuant to § 24.2-103, that The phrase, “it shall be unlawful for any person... to... exhibit... other campaign material” within the Code of Virginia, § 24.2-604 shall be interpreted as:

No person shall show, display, or exhibit any material, object, or item, which has the purpose of expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate or issue. Any person who does so shall be asked by the officers to cease from showing, displaying or exhibiting the material, object, or item, or to remove or cover it until they leave the prohibited area and polling place.

Nothing in this policy shall prohibit any person from bringing but not exhibiting any campaign material within 40 feet of any entrance of any polling place. Nor shall it prohibit a person who approaches or enters the polling place for the purpose of voting from wearing a shirt, hat, or other apparel on which a candidate’s name or a political slogan appears or from having a sticker or button attached to his apparel on which a candidate’s name or a political slogan appears.

This policy overturns State Board of Elections Policy 2008-007.
Pale Rider · August 21, 2015 at 12:23 pm
ThePlainsman -

1) I guessed party affiliation because your previous comments on this website belie your allegiances. I never said you didn't have a right to choose who you vote for, I just call them like I seem them. I don't understand how someone can flip flop between two parties who are so often on polar opposite sides of the issues, but go for it.

2) I think any reader here can clearly see that you are a Fox supporter. No one does the research in support of a candidate like you did, then refuses to answer any of the questions I have asked or acknowledged the changes that Mosier would make. It seems to me that yo hare playing like you are nonpartisan in this race, but you have a clear favorite.

3) A trend shows the OVERALL data. Of course there are counties in Virginia and nationwide that buck the trend, but, OVERALL, the trend shows that crime is down in Virginia and nationwide. You conveniently cherry pick your data, making Fauquier look great, compared to other counties. Sure Fauquier had a 51% drop in violent crimes, but Greensville had a 72% decrease in violent crime and 44.7% decrease in property crime - both are better than Fauquier. The truth is, you can get stats to say anything you want them to. You need to tai them in context.

In fact, you completely disregard other factors that the report says must be taken into consideration. In fact, the report states clearly; "Direct comparisons or rankings of individual cities and counties based solely on the data presented in this publication should be done with caution. There are many factors that inuence or contribute to crime. Crime in Virginia, however, restricts itself to population size alone to establish a crime rate. In addition to population size, some other factors believed to affect the type and volume of crime include": population density, economic conditions, Family cohesiveness, Citizen attitudes toward crime and police, Crime reporting practices of citizen, Standards governing appointments to the police force, employment availability, and so on. So, to assume that your stats are the end all of the job that Fox has done, run afoul of the very document that they are published in.

4) If you reread my previous comment about the drug plane, I said, "there is nothing in the email I was forwarded regarding a plane dropping drugs." I am simply stating that, in what I received, there was no mention of a drug plane. Again, this mailer or email or whatever it was, is clearly not from the Mosier campaign. I again ask, Should Mosier or Fox be completely responsible for everything that anyone does in their support?

5) If the voters of Fauquier elect him, then yes, I guess they do. Right?

6) I stated the actual cost, as provided by the commission, not me. I do find it concerning that it could take many staffing hours for the Fauquier Sheriff's Department to get the organization up to a basic accreditation level. I think it increases liability for the taxpayers of Fauquier County and that there are really no good arguments against accreditation. Once the first accreditation is done, the department would only have minimal costs to ensure recertification. I called the James City County Sheriff's Office (They are about the same size as Fauquier) this morning and spoke to a person in their communications department. It cost about $50,000 in staff time to get accredited in 2011 and since they maintained the standards, it will cost much less this time. That doesn't seem like a lot, out of the $17.7 million dollar budget that Fox gets for 2016, if you ask me.

My mind is not closed by any stretch of the imagination, but en if it was, you are deflection from your original post, where YOU ask why there needs to be a change. I have given you plenty of examples and asked a series of questions, but you have chosen not to respond or acknowledge them. So I ask, who is the one with a closed mind?

And to assume that, because someone doesn't immediately agree with you and your argument, it is sniping, it just silly. Is it not a valid question to ask why an unmarked car (with official plates) is handing out yard signs? I guess we are not allowed to ask such questions in Fauquier County.

I have not mentioned anything about heroin, drug planes, trucks, or so on. Trying to pin that on me is like nailing Jello to a wall - it just won't stick.

My Family loves Fauquier also, so lets make is safer. I'm not willing to maintain the status quo; we want better services for my tax dollar; we want and accredited department; we wonder why Fox is afraid of accreditation; and we feel that all politicians - including Fox should and can be held accountable.
Jim Griffin · August 21, 2015 at 10:30 am
BTW, Pale Rider's gang activity assertions are seriously flawed:

1. They are entirely from a time period before Fox was elected. I clicked on the link and found this: "This online tool is based on: Weisheit, Ralph A., and L. Edward Wells. GANGS IN RURAL AMERICA, 1996-1998 [Computer file]. ICPSR version. Normal, IL: Illinois State University, Dept. of Criminal Justice [producer], 2001. Ann Arbor, MI: Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2002. * trends may be out of date"

Fox was not yet elected at the time these statistics were gathered.

2. Neighboring counties show more gang activity: Where Fauquier is estimated to have a total of ten gang members (about 15 years ago), Loudon, to cite one example, is estimated to have more than 150, Prince William, too, at 100.

The report you cite, Pale Rider, to support your allegations of increasing gang activity are out-dated and fail to support your point. Besides, gang activity would should up in outcome statistics (violent and property crime) which both show Fauquier to be the safest nearby county over the decade after Fox was elected.

What is up over there? Are Mosier's supporters the gang that simply cannot shoot straight, whether loaded with anecdotes or statistics?

I look forward to more from the real Bob Mosier, not these half-baked, out-of-date assertions that prove the opposite. With friends like his, who needs enemies?
Jim Griffin · August 21, 2015 at 8:58 am
Also: A note to the author of the opinion piece we're commenting on. The last line you wrote is evidence of a crime in Virginia. It is illegal to wear a campaign pin at the polls. <smile>
Jim Griffin · August 21, 2015 at 8:55 am
I continue to seek evidence and rational discussion that leads to a good decision on the right sheriff. All things being equal, I'd go with the sheriff we have because objective numbers show we are safer under his leadership. Besides, we should have the backs of those who serve us in capacities like police and military service.

It troubles me to see you don't have his back, and you work either for or with him, so I take your concerns seriously (unlike the insane sniping). Yet what do we hear? A drumbeat for bigger government, higher pay, more deputies, motorcycles, more guns, higher traffic fines, accreditation, military equipment, and so on.

I like real Republicans who practice what they preach, not those who say one thing and do another. We don't need wanding (Holtzman-Vogel), a surveillance state (Hurt), Trans-Pacific Partnership authority for Obama (Hurt), and so on.

I am attracted by less government, lower taxes and real conservative politics, not the crazy stuff we hear from some lately. That Fox does more with less, eschewing retired military equipment (as one example), seems right, but I continue to listen carefully and will make a decision based on facts, like objective statistics that show Fauquier is safe and getting safer.

Like most moderates, I am appalled by unsubstantiated allegations and unproductive mud-slinging, worse still from those in the justice system who should know better. Joe Friday had it right: Just the facts, ma'am!
PoliceAdministrator · August 21, 2015 at 8:30 am
I don't see where accreditation is chasing a certificate in any way shape or form. Should we not have policies in place that make discipline and promotions fair? Our agency is accredited and it brings such policies that are adhered to regardless. Such policies bring minimal standards and accountability to the agency. Why would we not want that? I don't know either candidate personally but I have had the opportunity to speak with both of them on separate occasions within the past few months. Bob Mosier is well educated and experienced. It shows when he speaks. Sheriff Fox on the other hand just doesn't seem to have what it takes to lead our Sheriff's Office. Fox is not a manager. Being a former state trooper does not make him qualified. And crime statistics don't make someone a leader. I have been in law enforcement for 25 years and I am at the management level and well educated with a masters in police administration. I am sorry but Sheriff Fox does not possess the leadership qualities that are needed to run our Sheriff's Office. Sheriff Fox has become complacent during the years that he has been in office. He doesn't fight for our deputies. He simply sits back. I contacted two of our board of supervisors with concerns about deputies and equipment. One told me the Sheriff never asks for anything and the second stated that if the Sheriff asked he might get some of what he needs. That is unacceptable. As a leader you approach your board of supervisors and put in requests. You might not get all that you ask for but at least make the effort.

What also concerns me is that the Warrenton Police starts officers at $44,000 and the Sheriff's Office around $37,000. Again I find this unacceptable. I recall the article in the newspaper about MRAP armored vehicle. Sheriff Fox gave a response “That thing weighed 62,000 pounds,” he added. “I didn’t want one of my guys running that thing into somebody’s yard and getting stuck. That would take a big tow truck.” That response alone shows me that he lacks the education to be a leader. I read that and it was like I was reading a paper from Mayberry. An educated response would have been we cannot justify it at this time or that the maintenance costs outweigh the benefits.

Why do we have deputies without rifles and mobile data terminals in their cruisers? Mobile data terminals with the avl vehicle locator need to be installed in every cruiser. It is a safety issue. It would allow dispatch to know their location in the event of an emergency if they were to push their emergency radio on their portable or cruiser radio. Rifles should be issued and installed in every cruiser. Deputies regardless of the division they are assigned to just might have to respond to a call where a rifle would better protect them and the community. Don't think for a minute that criminals don't outgun law enforcement. When the Sheriff's Office received an army tactical gun this is the direct quote from Sheriff Fox. “We don’t want to be under-gunned,” he said. “That’s a problem across the country now. There are lots of military-type guns out there. You can buy one, why shouldn’t law enforcement have them? It only makes sense.” So why not equip every deputy sheriff with a rifle Sheriff Fox? Is it because you are simply too lazy to approach the board for them? This too is completely unacceptable. I brought these up to the two board of supervisor members when I talked with them. Again their response is the Sheriff never comes to us to ask. That answered my question when my first thought was that the board wouldn't fund both the mobile data terminals and rifles. The two board members reassured me that they have never been approached by the Sheriff about it. I want our deputies well equipped for any incident. I demand it. I cannot and will not support Sheriff Fox and his administrative staff because the status quo is good enough for them. We need a new manager in our Sheriff's Office. Comparing Sheriff Fox to Bob Mosier is like comparing an apple to an orange.
Jim Griffin · August 20, 2015 at 9:35 pm
PR: One more thing I forgot to address. You claim "Mosier even corrected the author of the email and all was set right. That is great leadership!"

Three days ago, August 17, same mailer claims Fox is corrupt. That is an allegation of illegality that is defamatory and demands evidence:

"Pray every night that Charlie Ray Fox drops out of the campaign race for Sheriff. I am praying for that daily so please support that prayer work. Let him go find another job somewhere else where he can be corrupt."

Obviously, your claim that great leadership got this "set right" misses the mark. It's only gotten worse, and as I said before, Mosier deserves better. If there is any proof of corruption on the part of Sheriff Fox, bring it forward now. I have an open mind as do many others and we will not vote to retain a corrupt sheriff, now matter how good are the statistics.

Just the same, we are smarter than to let this sort of sniping go without a call to step forward with proof: Of drug planes? Of Panamanian trucks? Of a need to acquire motorcycle officers to sit on our back roads?

And most of all, before you charge a sitting sheriff with corruption, praying for his resignation as some sort of moral imperative, bring forth the evidence. The campaign process deserves this if nothing else.
Jim Griffin · August 20, 2015 at 8:51 pm
Pale Rider:

I want to be kind, but it is difficult for a number of reasons:

1. You assume party affiliation where I have none. I choose the best candidate from either party and consider myself neither Democrat or Republican, a right I have as a Virginian (we can choose the primary of our choice anytime). It is a fact that the only candidate to whom I've given money over the past year is a Republican.

2. You infer I am a Sheriff Fox supporter when I've met neither candidate and am clear: I've not made up my mind and am keeping it open.

3. You assert that Fox rode a local, state and national trend. In fact, the opposite it true. If we track 2003, when Fox was elected, to 2012 (reported in the most recent Virginia Crime Trends) you get the following results:

2003-2012 Violent crime: Fauquier down -51.3%, Loudon down -39.5%, Culpeper down -17.0%, Madison up +167.8%, Rappahannock up +189.6., Prince William down -16.9%, Warren down -31.5%, Page up +9.9%, Orange down -9.7%, Stafford up +12.7%. Average of these: Violent crime was up +21.4% but fell in Fauquier by -51.3%.

2003-2012 Property crime: Fauquier: Down -27.0%, Loudon up +5.2%, Culpeper up +35.2%, Madison up +167.8%, Rappahannock up +29.1%, Prince William down -11.3%, Warren up +4.2%, Page up +5.6%, Orange up +17.9%. Average of these: Property crime was up +5.7% but down in Fauquier by -27.0.

All of which puts the lie to your principal claim: Fox was riding a trend. In fact, Fox's Fauquier was doing much better than the pack by a wide margin in each category. In fact, in both categories the county that did the best was Fauquier with Fox in charge, and it wasn't even close.

4. You imply there was no suggestion in a mailer about drug planes. From June 8, 2015, I quote: "Fauquier has plane drop and go spots that the drug cartels are using Fauquier County for." A highly unlikely assertion given military tracking to protect the Capital area and the presence in our county of a principal Tracon facility.

5. From the same mailer: "he understands the local court process and how to work with those parameters to still get the job done and build a reputation NOT to speed. He will bring back motorcycle officers for increasing hiding locations along back roads and main roads." Is this what the citizens of Fauquier want on their roads, including our back roads?

6. You imply accreditation is low cost, but the principal cost is staff time. I'd prefer the sheriff's staff was engaged in law enforcement instead of chasing a certificate. And here's a non-certificate that impresses me more: Fox came to Fauquier from the Virginia State Police, an important agency with which to coordinate.

I could go on, but will not because it is now clear that while I am trying to reconcile an open mind, yours is already closed, thus all the table pounding and continued sniping (unmarked police car? tax dollars?).

You've almost convinced me just as all those absurd mailings have convinced so many others. I want evidence, not sniping and false innuendo about heroin deaths, riding trends, drug plane drops, and Panamanian trucks. I do not want motorcycle cops hiding on back roads and do not think we need heavier fines and a new reputation on speeding.

My family loves Fauquier County and we feel very happy and safe here. Let's keep it that way, whomever wins. We are blessed to have two very good candidates for sheriff, but the excesses in campaigning speak for themselves. Too much table pounding, especially when the facts speak louder than either of our words.

Here's what's unfair: You misrepresenting the statistics, which is where most of us are focused.

We want to know: How has Fox done on crime according to objective measures? The numbers say Sheriff Fox has produced far better results than nearby counties (and I didn't even realize this until you pushed me to make a spreadsheet over the past hour). If you wanted to be safe over the past decade, you wanted to be in Fauquier County. The numbers speak for themselves.
Pale Rider · August 20, 2015 at 12:20 pm
ThePlainsman -

I asked a friend who did receive the email that you are referring to and he forwarded it onto me. First, while the person supports Mosier, it does not look like it came from his campaign directly. To cut through the innuendo, you should reach out to Bob directly and ask him. Second, there is nothing in the email I was forwarded regarding a plane dropping drugs. Is there another source that you can provide? Third, look - to think a candidate is responsible for everything that a supporter says is crazy. People say wild things sometimes. It is my understanding that Mosier even corrected the author of the email and all was set right. That is great leadership!

And what I am seeing from the supporter of Charlie Fox is a lot of "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." As if the citizens have no right to as important questions of an incumbent sheriff, that Fox has the right to latch onto a national trend of decreased crime and claim it is only because of his actions, and that he has no accountability for poor decisions he has made. And what should be said of the unmarked police car I saw stop on Route 17 and put up a Fox for Sheriff sign. Is that a kosher use of tax dollars?

What I hear from Bob's supporters is that it is time for change, accountability, and working for the community. That doesn't sound like pounding at all to me. That is a breath of fresh air.

Look, being a Democrat, I am not surprised that you are supporting the Democrat sheriff, it makes sense. But can you at least answer some of the questions I have asked? Only seems fair.
Bekemp · August 20, 2015 at 11:10 am
Pale Rider: I thought the sheep comment was pretty good too. I'm still for Fox.
Jim Griffin · August 20, 2015 at 10:33 am
Pale Rider: It was quite literally a mailing from one of Bob Mosier's supporters that made these absurd claims, including painting a picture of dramatically increased traffic enforcement. More fines = more taxes.

Donuts = overweight cops.

They have a saying in the law: When the facts are on your side, argue the facts. When the law is on your side, argue the law. When neither are on your side, pound on the table.

I hear lots of table pounding from Bob Mosier's supporters. I think they are doing Bob a disservice. He's likely better than he's being portrayed, and still I wonder why we are contemplating a change.
Pale Rider · August 20, 2015 at 10:19 am
I thought is was pretty good. Maybe Charlie can start putting up campaign signs with a Fox holding hands with a sheep. - Just kidding.

With campaigns there will always be accusations of sniping. I have never heard about drug planes or trucks from Panama and it has never been mentioned by anyone I know. Can I suggest that it could be paranoia on behalf of Charlie's supporters?

Who the heck mentioned donuts? And I told you the facts:

Please see my post below for the facts.
Jim Griffin · August 20, 2015 at 10:02 am
Sheep willing to be led by a fox?

C'mon -- you can do better than that!

And the sniping has gotten crazy. I have heard all of the following innuendo recently: Foreign drug planes are dropping drugs into our county (unlikely), trucks from Panama are speeding down Rt 17, Mosier will bring us heavy traffic police with motorcycle cops and fines will pay for it.

Does not sound like the county in which I live. And neither are the good crime stats simply statewide -- they are improvements in our county, which is safer than the state average.

I am waiting for facts, not internal grievances or complaints about cops eating donuts. From what I can tell, Fox is doing a good job, but, hey, convince me and others. We've got open minds.
Pale Rider · August 20, 2015 at 10:02 am
Plainsman - Can you give me the names of some of the counties that have decided to not get accreditation? I would like to contact them and understand their reasons why.

As for your "sniping comment," there is a difference between sniping and telling the truth. Are you opposed to holding elected leaders accountable for their actions?

Oh, and as for the "expensive accreditation," consider this from the Virginia Law Enforcement Professional Standards Commission:

The only costs for the Virginia Law Enforcement Professional Standards Commission (VLEPSC) program are those incurred for room and board for the assessment team at the time of the on-site assessment, and a $250.00 application fee upon receipt and acceptance of the Agency Participation Agreement.

So I guess that argument is out the window. Try again.
Pale Rider · August 20, 2015 at 9:55 am
Bekemp - You should have reason to doubt why the crime stats have dropped. It is because of a state and national trend, not because of Charlie Fox. Looks at the stats and see for your self, otherwise you are just a sheep willing to be led by a Fox.
Jim Griffin · August 20, 2015 at 9:52 am
Not my stats, which is why I left links for all, and I will add this one that negates the so-called "reliable source" on heroin deaths (in decline, worse in other counties, all sourced out of Baltimore):

Facts speak for themselves. It appears Sheriff Fox is doing a very good job, and I will note there are now other counties deciding to avoid expensive accreditation for their county law enforcement efforts.

I do not know Sheriff Fox, am not even remotely involved his campaign, nor do I know his challenger, but I am skeptical of the sniping at the sheriff so I decided to look for evidence, not innuendo, and share it here on-line for what it is worth. No need to trust me -- the links to the evidence are here for all to read.
Pale Rider · August 20, 2015 at 9:52 am
Plainsman - You asked, "what make our county so sorely in need of change?"

Lets start with the accreditation issue. There are currently 92 accredited Sheriff departments in the commonwealth, Fauquier is not one of them. Democrat Charlie Fox has not even tried to have the sheriff's office accredited. I wonder why? Accreditation from the Virginia Law Enforcement Professional Standards Commission, which is staffed by sheriffs and police chiefs who have used best practices in law enforcement for years and want to ensure that the citizen of Virginia have the best law enforcement organizations possible. By becoming accredited, it holds our county law enforcement to a higher standard, gives protection against potential liability problems, ensures that we have the best qualified deputies, improves transparency with he public, and allows the commission to step in and help improve the sheriffs office in areas where they are delinquent. I am not sure why Charlie Fox would be opposed to any of those things. Is he afraid of transparency? Is he afraid of accountability? Is he concerned about how the sheriff's office may be delinquent in certain areas? Charlie Fox really need to answer these important questions.

Next, yes, crime statistics show that crime is down in Virginia, following a national trend. But there were still 444,022 type A crimes (including sexual assault, kidnapping, robbery, drug offenses, fraud, and so on) last year in Virginia, so I think it is safe to say that it is great that crime is down, but there is still a lot of room for improvement. Additionally, is crime the only thing that the sheriffs office is concerned about? How is Charlie dealing with with the aging population of Fauquier County? Why hasn't he been actively pursuing community watch organizations in the service districts, where growth is focused? Heck, the only time I see a sheriff's car in my neighborhood is when they are setting up speed traps to increase revenue.

As for your statistics, again, is crime the only measure of success for a Sheriff's office? If show, is Charlie Fox proud that he has doubled the number of drug arrests? I am worried that he is not getting to the root of the problem - where the drugs are coming from and why people are using.

Statistics are tricky things and the way you are using the stats from the Virginia Department of Criminal Services belie the truth. The face is, looking through the stats - EVERY department saw decreases in crime over the same time. So, either Charlie Fox brought the fear of God with him into Virginia, or the decrease of crime in Fauquier County is part of a larger trend that Charlie Fox cannot and should not take credit for. I also find it an amusing coincidence that you use reports and studies from the same department that would be responsible for accrediting the Fauquier Sheriff's Office. I guess they are good for their reporting, but they can go pound sand when it comes to accreditation.

How is this for the changes Bob Mosier will make:

1) He will get the Fauquier County Sheriff's Office accredited by the Virginia Law Enforcement Professional Standards Commission.

2) Zero tolerance for criminal activity. (So we don't have any more mess ups like the issue with manslaughter death in Southern Fauquier)

3) Bob will address the increasing gang activity in the county, as we are 8 points ahead of the regional average which puts us at a higher gang risk.( And here is an article about a gang bust that includes several from Fauquier and on of their leaders, William Sykes, who is from Bealeton.

4) Bob will work with communities in Fauquier to set up a robust community watch program.

5) Bob will continue to make inroads into the minority community, reaching out to their leaders and ensure that they are on the same page when it does to crime, engagement, and enforcement.

6) Bob will bring the sheriff's office into the 21st century by updating the outdated programs that Charlie Fox continues to use. He will introduce online reporting of non-emergency crimes, allowing deputies to be more efficient in their use of time.

7) Bob will increase the number of deputies on patrol in Fauquier County - the fourth largest county land wise, decreasing response times.

Markinkus - I agree, if it isn't broke, don't fix it. In this case the sheriff's office is broke and it is time to fix it!

Bekemp · August 20, 2015 at 9:39 am
If THEPLAINSMAN's statistics are correct, and I have no reason to doubt them, then Sheriff Fox has done an excellent job. Proven results matter.

martinkus · August 20, 2015 at 12:17 am
If it isn't broke, don't try to fix it. I share the same sentiment as The Plainsman on this issue.
PoliceAdministrator · August 19, 2015 at 11:00 pm
Law enforcement accreditation is a must. Why Sheriff Fox has refused to put this in place makes a law enforcement professional like myself wonder. Law enforcement accreditation will bring much needed policies ThePlainsman. Currently promotion review policies are unfair. Our current sheriff changes the policies to make personnel eligible that would not be. Current discipline policies are not fair and are biased. Accreditation would put a stop to this and make an across the board policy for each that would have to be followed. Why would you not want that? How about job protection? Sheriff Fox took away the county grievance procedure/county policy that protected them from unfair practices. Our deputies put their lives on the line each and every day. They deserve that policy that our former Sheriff gave them.

Sheriff Fox no longer requires a county physical to determine whether or not our deputies are fit for duty or need to improve. Why would we not want this? The lives of each deputy and citizen depend on it. Have you seen some of our deputies? Smoking in public. Chewing and spitting tobacco products in public. Being overweight. The decline of health and fitness in law enforcement is something that has been recognized across the country. Our agency has physical requirements. Officers that don't meet the fit for duty requirement are given time to make the proper corrections so that they are fit enough to do the job. Our deputies must have the same requirements.

You can't judge leadership by statistics. If you take a look at the crime reports to the local paper you will see that the high number of drug arrests and types of drugs that are being taken off suspects are not being reported. Sheriff Fox is not reporting the serious heroin problem that Fauquier County is currently facing. A reliable source provided me with information that Fauquier County leads the planning district in heroin deaths and that the overdoses from heroin are worse than the public could ever imagine.

So what will Bob do differently? Bob will bring law enforcement accreditation that will make our sheriff's office an accredited law enforcement agency, something that Sheriff Fox has simply refused to do. Bob will bring the leadership that our deputies have not had under the tenure of Sheriff Fox. That alone is a good enough answer for me. I for one support Bob Mosier for Sheriff. He has my vote.
Jim Griffin · August 19, 2015 at 7:21 pm
Bob sounds like a great guy, especially through your eyes, those of a family friend. You said in your next to last sentence that "Bob will facilitate the change we are so sorely in need of."

Tell us: What makes our county so sorely in need of change? The latest statistics show crime significantly down in the county in 2014:

If we need a new sheriff, Bob sounds up to the job. But do we really need a new sheriff? Not that I can tell, but I have an open mind. Convince me there's a problem.

That will be difficult to support with statistics, however. Fox was elected in 2003, when the violent index crime rate in Fauquier was 160.4. By 2011 Fox brought it down by half, to 87.8, and the next year lower still to 78.1. The property index crime rate fell too, from 1,515.1 in 2003 to 1,395.5 in 2011 and 1,106.1 in 2012. The drug arrest rate also shows great progress, from a pitifully low 426.8 in 2003 when he was elected, doubling to 943.0 in 2011 and 958.8 in 2012.


What will Bob do differently from Sheriff Fox? Make the case for change with actual commitments we can follow. I haven't yet heard a better plan than continuing our current course, which is demonstrably producing favorable results and outcomes.
Facebook comments
Enter your email address above to begin receiving
news updates from via email.
Thursday, December 3
Fauquier infections total 1,559 since pandemic started, up 19 Thursday, health department reports
Thursday, December 3
Elected officials would get more flexibility to juggle responsibilities and participate remotely in meetings, but critics worry about erosion of face-to-face accountability
Wednesday, December 2
After decades of investment and growth, Southern Fauquier manufacturer rejoins Nasdaq exchange
More Fauquier news
© Copyright 2011-2018

50 Culpeper Street, Suite 3
Warrenton, Virginia 20187
Crime Log
Add Your News
The Big Picture
Ellen’s Kitchen
and Garden

Real Estate
For Sale
Legal Notices
Post an Ad
Terms of Service