By Phillip Morris
Plain Dealer
Copyright 2007 Plain Dealer Publishing Co.
CLEVELAND, Ohio — Over the weekend, I heard from a colleague of Terrance Hough Jr., the Cleveland firefighter charged Saturday with three counts of aggravated murder. He offered a different firehouse perspective on his man.
As a former supervisor of Hough’s, the co-worker said he believes the public portrait of the accused, as a loose cannon, is a distortion. He also believes the depiction reflects unfairly on the department.
I don’t fully agree with him or all of his conclusions, but here’s what he had to say.
“Nobody in their right mind can defend what has happened. However, there has been a lot of discussion over the accused firefighter’s ‘temper’ and apparent propensity toward ‘rage,’ ” he wrote.
“I was his direct supervisor for a year or so. I was obligated to evaluate him and his work for the period. What I observed could not have possibly [predicted] what he is accused of doing. Period.
“Nobody, no matter what they say, would have stood by and let this happen had they known what was to occur.
“I am frustrated ... as I think many of my co-workers are.”
Firefighters are not allowed to choose who they live with when they report to duty. Once off the clock, their movement and associations remain restricted. They must live in the city.
They never get a chance to handpick their neighbors. This inflexibility may or may not have fueled Hough’s act of rage. But it provides yet another reason to revisit a law that the city desperately believes it needs to survive.
Three young people are dead because they enjoyed playing with fireworks.
Two other shooting victims survived.
But questions abound.
What really set off Hough?
Did the noise become that unbearable?
How could a running feud with neighbor, Jacob Feichtner, 24, who was an enthusiastic and frequent party host, rise to merit his burial today?
Is there something much deeper and systemic that transformed a competent safety worker into an accused killer?
Hough’s rabid dislike of the city’s residency rule and affirmative action efforts were first highlighted by Plain Dealer reporter Mike Tobin in a story published two days after the slayings. Hough’s former supervisor confirmed Hough’s unhappiness.
He didn’t like living next to Feichtner. But more than that, he didn’t like being told where he had to live.
How long will conflict between state law and Cleveland’s rules on residency continue to drive a wedge between the city and the emergency personnel sworn to serve and protect?
The city promotes regionalism but sues to keeps its personnel within the city limits.
It seems unlikely that the stress of being forced to live in Cleveland, coupled with the stress of fighting fires for a living, could push Hough to murder.
If it could, he was psychologically unfit to serve and should have been weeded as a cadet. Residency rules should only make one furious - not felonious.
Still, one can’t help but wonder how many other “ticking time bombs” are embedded in the city’s safety forces? How many other safety workers are being unfairly forced to live next to neighbors they hate?