A lot of people—from Joe Boever’s cousins Nick and Victor Nemec, to the press, to the Governor herself—are wondering why it’s taking so long to hold Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg accountable for killing Joe Boever on Highway 14 last September. Ranvsborg has admitted he killed Boever. The police report from the September 12 crash says Ravnsborg was driving distracted. Ravnsborg’s bushwah notwithstanding, he committed a felony crime: second-degree manslaughter. Why wait to arrest, charge, and prosecute this killer?
Maybe the Army needs him. According to Ravsnborg’s official biography, the highest ranking killer in the state is still a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army Reserves and “continues to serve as an operations officer at both Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, and Bismarck, North Dakota.” Whatever Colonel Ravnsborg is doing for the Reserves (and let’s hope it’s not still driving trucks), maybe he brings some unique skill set of such vital importance to national security that putting Jason in jail would invite Red Dawn.
Or maybe someone is slowing the wheels of justice just enough to let Jason get his final promotion. A year before Ravnsborg killed Boever, Ravnsborg told WNAX that he was putting off retirement because he wanted to make full-bird colonel:
I would like to stay in. I enjoy it yet. I love being around soldiers…. I’m about a year or thereabouts from making full colonel and that’s always been one of my goals, so we’ll take a look… [Attorney General and Lieutenant Colonel Jason Ravnsborg, in “SD Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg Hands over Army Reserve Battalion Command,” WNAX, 2019.09.18—date determined from SoundCloud audio clip data].
Making full colonel would be a nice achievement. It would also move Ravnsborg up one pay grade, from O-5 to O-6. Moving from lieutenant colonel to full colonel appears to raise a reservist’s pay for one weekend, four drills, by 16.6%, from $955.76 to $1,114.36. An extra $158.60 for a weekend’s work can buy a guy a new snowblower pretty quickly.
The move from O-5 to O-6 would also increase Ravnsborg’s Army pension. I don’t know the details of Ravnsborg’s service, other than that he appears to have enlisted in 1996 at age 20. But when I throw those meager facts and some guess variables into this military pension calculator (and I may not even be using the right calculator, so, reader-veterans, help me out!), I find simply rising from O-5 to O-6 could increase the value of a veteran’s pension by 25%.
Ravnsborg, of course, would have trouble making full colonel if he got arrested and convicted of manslaughter. Federal law prohibits any person convicted of a felony from enlisting or re-enlisting in the armed forces. Deny Jason his bird, and you deny him a lot of bucks. Conviction for killing a man may not endanger the pension as a whole, but a legal tangle that derails Jason’s final hoped-for promotion would make that pension significantly smaller.
But for the delay in Jason’s prosecution to have anything to do with his craving for full-coloneldom (and coloneldom sounds much like what we should call our A.G.), we must establish that someone with influence over the decision to prosecute (like Hyde County Deputy State’s Attorney and Ravnsborg’s USD Law 2001 classmate Emily Sovell) has anything to gain from doing Ravnsborg a favor. Ravnsborg, of course, has nothing to offer. The Ravnsborg investigation has already caused the cops in our two largest cities and counties to declare they can’t trust Ravnsborg with investigations. Killing Joe Boever killed his political career, which depended solely on dutiful in-party pandering, not any actual legal skill or charisma. Ravnsborg won’t be headlining any fundraisers or handing out any more patronage jobs (as he did to another USD Law 2001 classmate, Tim Bormann, for whom Ravnsborg created a whole new job). The only thing a prosecution slow-walker could possibly gain from keeping Ravnsborg on the colonel track is a cut of his O-6 pension, and for Pete’s sake, there are a lot easier and reputationally safer ways to graft a quick buck onto your paycheck from the SDGOP machine than obstructing justice for Jason Ravnsborg. (Good grief: just sign up to be Kristi Noem’s bodyguard for a weekend, and no one will ever know how much cash you collect!)
The delay in action on the seemingly open-and-shut Ravnsborg case could be entirely unrelated to Ravnsborg’s military side gig. It could be prosecutors recognize they are about to take down a significant player in the Republican machine and have to make sure they have their ducks in a row. Or it could be the same recognition has prosecutors scrambling for a face-saving way out.
But when something puzzling is happening in South Dakota politics, we need to look for the money. And the money at stake here could be Jason Ravnsborg’s military pension and the sizable boost he’ll get if he can hang on long enough to make colonel.
Oh lord you’ve outdone yourself this time. They’ve made it clear they are waiting on evidence. Could they be lying? Anything is possible, but Ravnsborg deserves due process (no more or no less) than any other resident of the state. Even Noem has said hurry up and get this completed, unless she is lying. Is that possible? Yes, as he may be willing to do whatever she wants until this is settled, like refusing to further defend Amendment A, but all of this is complete speculation. Why can you not simply let this play out rather than make wild assumptions?
If it were to have “played out” that would taken place in late Sept. Or early Oct. Almost 5 months??? Waiting for it to play out??? Not buying that thought.
It’s disgraceful – the whole mess. It should take about 10 days for one good prosecutor to investigate a case like this. The tragedy is that an innocent man died and the guilty party continues to not only walk free but wield power over the rest of us. That’s wrong.
According to the law, Ravburg would have to serve three years in grade (0-6) to retire at that grade.
Pay grade and rank are entirely seperate in the minds of those of us who have served. An 0-6 may wear the “eagles,” but they may never be a ‘Colonel.”
Buck, can an arrest for a civilian crime stop consideration of a promotion?
Hap, you’re so trusting.
Joe Boever’s family deserves due process. We have a police report saying Ravnsborg was driving distracted. We have a body and a wrecked car. How much more evidence do we need?
RICO
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
A United States Federal law that provides
for extended criminal penalties and civil action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization
Sounds like the SDGOP to me.
Started by Bill Janklow, the stink remains to this day.
Don’t give up on South Dakota. It takes a long time to recover from cancer.
Just hope we’re not stage 4.
Justice delayed is justice ‘wingnutted.’
Nix, interesting analogy to cancer. Could political cancer reach stage 4? Could corruption be so severe that a state can only die?
Quite a few more national press articles coming out about this delay the last few days.
Cory,
I just don’t know. I am grateful for your forum. Without it my neighbors might get sick of me.
I just read your article on the State plane
records.
It is so maddening.
Keep up the good fight. I am a 2 time
cancer survivor so yes, there is hope.
Hope for all of us and the State that I love.
No love lost for Ravnsborg here, (I actually despise the man for personal reasons), but this is rank, irresponsible speculation that reflects poorly on you, Cory. This is Glenn Beck-esque.
Right….people are slow walking the investigation because they want a cut of Mr. Ravnsborg’s pension. Right…
Mr. H, you have joined the ranks of those insaner than most with your latest dabble into derangement.
Your concern doesn’t at all reflect poorly on you Cory.
“Great and good are rarely the same man.” – Churchill
How many ju8dgments did drumpf avoid with nthe Scotus, McCTurtlefartface and others slow walking cases detrimental to drumpf, running out the clock to save drumpf’s pastey orange wasicu hide?
Remove him from office, strip his rank and allow him stand and face the music he so much must have wanted! Any other individual would face those consequences! It is a black eye for the State of South Dakota to allow such an individual smirk at the legal system and thumb his nose at the citizens of the State.
Sad state of affairs when a man is allowed to continue to walk unashamedly in the halls of the state house and be an “upright” citizen of the state… anywhere other than South Dakota he’d be prosecuted and be made to face the music. Sorry, that’s just the justice system that SHOULD be existing. Would others in the state be allowed to run free like he has? I’m confused but very sad to see even the governor allowing such shenanigans. But, she’s a bird of another feather also…..
Haphazard Camper’
You say “let it play out” but I would guess that even you would set a limit to how long that should be? All these months hasn’t been long enough? Are you a GOP ‘mole’ in hiding adding to their ‘cover’? They should be SO proud of his actions in not defending
the 54% of state’s voters that wanted a law in place by July allowing them to possess and use marijuana. The GOP has known, at least should have known, for years that this was coming at them sooner or later and been ready for it. But no, like the “heads in the sand they are’. they denied to the end and now they will overturn the voter’s will with a watered down restrictive law of their own. Betcha!
Cory, he is also ‘padding’ his length of ‘service’ in the state retirement system!
No need, anyone anymore, to respond to grudz’ inane comments.
We have to know more. As much as possible. The Argus Leader has reported it can take 8 months for a full investigation, so am I too trusting? I think and feel we must honor law enforcement while at the same time holding them to a high standard. When it gets passed off to politicians, that’s a different matter. Ask yourself, if this were a Democratic administration and a Democrat AG, would you make the same judgments? I know this doesn’t go over favorably, but we can all act within the law but without good judgment. Joe Boever should not have been walking at night so close to the edge of the road. His family has said he had a drinking problem, so shouldn’t we also consider he may have acted recklessly? There was no sensible reason for him to be there that night. He was supposed to meet his cousin the following morning. Is Ravnsborg lying? I don’t know. We can be suspicious, but not assume. Many times before I have simply asked this blog to let all the facts come out first, before drawing conclusions. When this is done, his family should have access to all the investigative data, but they should also be willing to accept that he may have acted in a reckless manner. In his own distracted driving accident that very morning he went off the road, hit a hale bale, fortunately not two kids on an ATV. Then he walks out there at night giving very little distance to oncoming traffic. Maybe he didn’t do anything illegal, but he may have done something in poor judgement that contributed to his death. None of this means the AG should be let off the hook, but simply let the facts come in first.
Wow, happy camper offers a lot of speculation for someone that strongly objected to Cory’s admitted speculation.
BCB, I didn’t say those things happened. My intent is to say we must keep an open mind, let the facts come in, and consider all possibilities. Cory’s are meant to malign.
It’s challenging to think that President Biden would nominate killer Ravnsborg to colonel or that the US Senate would consent to such a nomination.
Yes, a civilian crime, omission, or commission may effect a nomination and / or consent.
Resolution! Seems there needs to be some resolution… lots of items to take into consideration in the matter. But, to kick it down the road just to”kick it down the road” because a politician is involved… that’s wrong. To kick it down the road to allow a potentially liable person to get a generous retirement package… that’s wrong also. RESOLUTION. Then, everyone can resume their everyday responsibilities.
happy camper, I agree that you didn’t say those things happened, which seems evident by my use of the phrase “a lot of speculation.” As best I could tell Cory likewise didn’t assert his speculation was factual. Indeed, he himself called it “rank speculation” in the title of the post. And whether Cory “meant to malign” seems to be even more speculation, as I don’t recall reading such a claim anywhere in his post.
The problem I see with your speculation, as well as with Cory’s speculation in this particular story, is that both seem just too much like Donald Trump’s use of the phrase “a lot of people are saying” to imply the accuracy of some derogatory claim when there is no basis in fact to support such a claim.
Okay BCB, I am reacting to other speculation that I think is damaging, including the slanted article written by Tom Lawrence at The South Dakota Standard printed at The Daily Beast. The family is hurting, but if there is no basis in fact to support any of these claims, then aren’t you suggesting silent, patient speculation would be the best course of action? But, if that silence has been broken, then don’t we all have a responsibility to be open to a fair and just conclusion, wherever that may go?
happy, I agree that we should do our best “to be open to a fair and just conclusion, wherever that may go” whether or not the silence has been broken with unwarranted speculation.
The thing is BCB, when people of authority or influence tell us an election has been stolen, or suggest a person must be guilty, it taints the waters.
Unlikely money, but if a former influential relationship exists between Ravansborg and Sovell, that could affect her judgement, it must come to light.
happy camper, I fully agree with the observation that speculation can indeed “taint the waters.”
It is a fact, not speculation, however, that guilty or not, the process followed in Ravnsborg’s case is substantially different than every single vehicle/death case I have seen in the past in which the driver of a vehicle that kills a pedestrian is known. In every case the driver has been either released immediately because it is clear that the driver did nothing wrong, or the driver is taken into custody and must face a proceeding that independently determines whether there is probable cause to believe the driver was at fault. If an ongoing investigation is necessary, virtually every driver who is taken into custody is still booked and either held in pre-trial detention to await a determination by either a grand jury or a magistrate whether probable cause supports continued detention.
The existence of probable cause does not mean the driver is guilty, and does not even mean the driver is more likely guilty than not. Rather, it simply means that there is a reasonable basis for believing that the driver may have commited a crime.
It is not speculation, but is a clear fact that Ravnsborg was neither taken into custody, nor immediately exonerated after it was discovered he killed a man.
It is not speculation that according information already made public Ravnsborg was distracted while driving when he left the proper driving lane and struck and killed the victim. Such a finding might be in error, but that ultimately would be up to an impartial finder of fact, such as a judge or jury. It is not speculation that the information made public by itself is evidence to that Ravnsborg may have committed a crime when he killed a pedestrian, and thus satisfies the probable cause standard that is supposed to be applied to every person in similar circumstances. It is not speculation that means such a driver is to be charged and either held in pre-trial detention pending completion of the investigation, or released on bail with specific conditions designed to protect the public and assure the driver’s appearance for further proceedings.
Since the above factual matters are beyond mere speculation, I cannot be surprised that some folks engage in subsequent speculation that “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”
BCB, the main thing is we agree with your quote Cory’s speculation is “just too much like Donald Trump’s use of the phrase ‘a lot of people are saying.'” A lot of people said the election was stolen, but it wasn’t, and though they refused to accept the sixty-some court proceedings, those proceedings were credible. Although you’re not surprised others do, we cannot delegitimize the outcome of this investigation until it is complete.
happy camper, I doubt that we will ever be able to either legitimize or “delegitimize the investigation” regardless of its outcome. The investigation will result in a decision of whether to charge Ravnsborg with a crime, but unless someone investigates the investigators and prosecutors involved, which seems unlikely, whatever has motivated their unusual treatment of Ravnsborg in this case will remain a mystery and entice speculation. Typically a prosecutor ends up in a situation where no matter the decision someone is unhappy and suspects inappropriate motives, and no doubt that will happen again in this case.
I note that at least historically, the mere fact of being a Republican attorney general, governor and congressman in a heavily Republican district didn’t keep Bill Janklow out of prison. It only took two weeks after the accident before Janklow was charged with manslaughter. I do not know, but this lag in charging him may mean that like Ravnsborg, Janklow was not immediately taken into custody. Perhaps someone more familiar with the facts can clarify. In any event, it would be helpful to understand what the prosecutor perceives as the difference between the relatively prompt charging decision in Janklow’s case and the extraordinary delay in Ravnsborg’s case.
A lot of people are indeed saying that the General Derangement Syndrome is growing fast amongst the libbies, nationwide. And In Iowa, where Mr. Mike lives, they have rescinded the mask orders and are running around bare faced and free.
This does enrage some of you, and a lot of people realize that. But most people are OK with it.
Wingnuts probably learned their lesson in charging Janklow as quickly as they did. Janklow did try to weasel his way out of responsibility by claiming, if memory serves, he was doing government business and was untouchable because of it, or some such claptrap.
We didn’t rescind mask mandates, Grudzilla, the magat guv did on her own. And it puts iowans at a higher risk of covid again.
The “Derangement Syndrome” verbiage started with Obama Derangement Syndrome, racist pubs that got paranoid seeing a black man as president.
Ahhh, c’mon Grudz, give your B.S. a rest, ok? The covid bug loves you and your sort!
Mr. mike, your state has rescinded mask mandates. The libbie media itself has said so. My advice to you, young sir, is to continue staying home, and wear two masks. If you need me to send you some fixings and stuff, just shout out, and we will forward some packages with fixings.
Ravsnborg gets the janklow treatment https://apnews.com/article/south-dakota-pierre-192acb129ad9cf2c901f9d26a2ba7e11
Can Mike Volek be charged with dereliction of duty failing to obtain a sobriety test immediately upon notification of the the incident?
No Mike, Ravnsborg appears to be let off the hook. Janklow was charged with two class 2 misdemeanors (speeding and running a stop sign) and reckless driving, which supported a homicide charge and prison term. Ravnsborg also was charged with two class two misdemeanors (unsafely driving outside a lane and being on his phone while driving before the crash) but then was only charged with careless driving and no homicide charge.
South Dakota statutes define careless driving as driving in a manner nearly identical to reckless driving, and offers no meaningful distinction that i could see orther than the fact that it is not a reckless driving charge. Reckless driving is defined as by SDCL 32-24-1 as
Meanwhile careless driving is defined by SDCL 32-24-8 as:
I note that reckless driving requires a lack of “circumspection” while that language is omitted from the careless driving definition.
To me this charging decision is simply inexplicable, especially since the issue of whether Ravnsborg acted with the requisite “circumspection” normally would be a pure factual question for a jury to decide, not a prosecutor. Why Janklow’s two class 2 misdemeanors supported a reckless and Ravnsborg’s does not make little sense, especially since in each factual situation someone was killed as a result of the comission of these class 2 misdemeanors.
bcb my question was whether the sheriff committed a crime for failure to administer an sobriety test in a timely manner.
How come they didn’t have a jury decide, BCB? INot surprised Recklessborg would get a slap on the wrist.
How convenient that his phone was locked right when he hit Boever but he was using it before and such clockwork he calls 911 within a minute of the crash. Most people are just getting their bearings on everything, trying to figure out what happened in the first few minutes of an accident. I call BS.
Mike, sorry about that. I put up my post before I saw your question about the sobriety test. My post was not intended to respond to any question, but to clarify that according to the news release I saw, that Ravnsborg did not get “the Janklow treatment” as stated in your first comment.
As to whether the sheriff committed a crime, such as dereliction of duty for his failure to require Ravnsborg to take an immediate sobriety test, that would depend on whether there are statutes or rules that mandate law enforcement officers to give such a test, and if so then under what circumstances. I have never encountered such a statute. I suspect, but don’t claim to know, that any relevant statutes merely authorize, rather than require, the taking of a blood test.
Jenny, I have the same question as you do. The prosecutor’s reported excuse for not bring the charge of reckless driving and manslaughter seems quite odd and inconsistent with what usually happens in similar cases such as in Janklow’s case, especially since careless driving is a lessor included offense to reckless driving. I see no reason that a jury could not have heard all the evidence and defense arguments and then made a decision, just as they did in Janklow’s case.
The military isn’t terribly tolerant of any civilian charges. The Reserve runs a little different than active duty. If he’s an O-5, hoping for O-6, it could shut that down. As far as retirement, Reserve is totally different https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/Reserve.aspx They normally don’t draw until age 60. I was retired 2 years from active duty by the time he joined the reserve.