Family of Kyle Plush Takes Issue with Local Paper

The father of the teen who died in the back of his van at Seven Hills School wants people to know that it is not his family who is demanding an independent review into the death of Kyle Plush. Ron Plush emailed a statement to Newsradio 700WLW pointing out that the newspaper got the headline wrong:

  • The headline in the local paper this morning states: "Family of teen who died in van calls for independent investigation after report clears dispatchers, officers" . I want to be clear that our family did not ask for an independent investigation during the 5/14 City Council session. What we asked for were answers to specific questions.

Ron Plush says his family supports the independent review which is being launched by Cincinnati City Council. The Chairman of the Law and Public Safety Committee tells our Bill Cunningham he was disappointed in the police review which he calls incomplete. Chris Smitherman is promising to get answers to all of the questions that the Plush family still has about how his desperate calls to 911 for help did not result in providing the life saving assistance he needed.

Here is the list of the questions that the Plush family wants answered.

Plush Family Questions (5-14-18)

* It was reported that the first call 911 attendant had the approximate GPS location of Kyle’s phone and therefore his Van, is that true?

* By approximate GPS location do we mean within 5-10 feet of where Kyle was later found?

* If true, should that information have been transmitted to the investigating officers?

* The media reports that the officers were sent to the wrong address, is that true?

* Did the 7 hills school security films verify whether anyone looking for Kyle ever entered the parking lot as shown in the GPS pinpoint information possessed by the call attendant number 1?

* And is the media correct when they reported the approximate GPS location information was also known by the #2 call attendant?

* Should we assume that the officers on the scene were aware that 911 call taker would have had or the ability to provide the approximate GPS location of the 911 caller?

* Was it her responsibility to transmit that GPS location to someone?

* What purpose does the ALI longitude and latitude information derived from the 911 call have other than to determine the location of a 911 caller?

* If #2 attendant’s system was not working, did she have other forms and manners of communication to give the location of the caller to the first responders?

* Did the second call attendant actually make a documented report of a computer and system failure at the time?

* Or even that day?

* Are outages of 911 call-ins that are dropped supposed to be documented spontaneously?

* If the system fails, is there someone at 911 Center to give emergency assistance?

* The media reports that call attendant #1 was giving a 90% acceptable rating of her conduct relating to this 911 call in for help. Is this true?

* Did the high marks in that evaluation include any additional rating for leaving out key information that Kyle provided in his call such as "the banging, screaming, and the knocking that could be heard on the call?

What about the phrases of "I'm going to die here", and I'm in need of desperate help"?

* Are leaving out any of those items considered “acceptable”?

* I understand the second call attendant knew at the time of the failure that this was a follow up 911 call. Is this true?

* If so, she would have known what the first call attendant knew?

* Since the second call is very high quality that can be heard even today on playback, is the recording only available after there is no time to respond to an emergency situation? When did the call audio actually come available?

* Is one of the reasons the documented report is to be made at the time of the failure to further ensure it actually occurred?

* And specifically how long it lasted?

* And exactly what time it started?

* Has any system failure actually been verified by anyone other than the call attendant?

* Any repairs made?

* Is it standard protocol that first responders don’t get out of their vehicle to check for a victim when dispatch gives them detail of someone “stuck in a vehicle" (van in this case)”?

* In the event a first responder makes a comment “ I didn’t expect we would find anything” is it safe to assume that the level of urgency they use during the response cycle is somewhat low?

* Do first responders have the authority to conclude that a 911 call is a prank or do they treat every call with the same level of seriousness?

* The dispatch was put out for “unknown trouble” at 3:22 on 4/10. Is the specific detail from the 911 caller provided to the first responder if the call is classified as “unknown trouble?

* The call documentation calls out details “stuck in van outside of 7 hills parking lot”, ‘hear banging, yelling, and then screaming”. “I’m trapped in my van”, help, Banging, I’m gonna die here. Would this be something other than unknown trouble and if so why not?

* When a call taker here's a phrase in a call that references something about dying does that in any way change the classification level of the call?

* Is it true the 2nd call was terminated (term “disconnected by agent”) by Amber Smith after 2:43? If so why?