The decade-long travesty of justice that assailed local dentist Dr. David Botsko because of an out-of-control Davenport Civil Rights Commission (DCRC) is finally over thanks to a ruling by the Iowa Civil Rights Commission on Friday, May 7, dismissing all charges against him. Iowans can be reassured that when due process is actually followed, testimonies actually read, and evidence actually considered and weighed against the rule of law, justice does prevail, at least when the Iowa Civil Rights Commission is adjudicating. Davenport residents, however, have no such assurances where the DCRC is concerned.

On April 29, the Iowa Supreme Court heard oral arguments for the appeal of a nine-year-old Davenport Civil Rights Commission (DCRC) case, Botsko v. Nabb. Finally, much-needed clarity was brought to bear by attorney Tom Waterman, who presented on David Botsko's behalf. (A link to the 28-minute video is available HERE .)

It's hard to imagine a six-year old legal battle with a city commission that is out to get you, especially with no substantial evidence to support its claims. Such is the case with Davenport dentist Dr. David Botsko and the Davenport Civil Rights Commission (DCRC) in Naab v.

On March 30, 2005, the Davenport Civil Rights Commission (DCRC) filed a motion "to strike the March 28, 2005, order setting hearing on petitioner's petition for judicial review." The petitioner is Dr. David Botsko; the petition for judicial review is Botsko's appeal of the DCRC's Final Determination against him in Nabb v.

This article is part three of an in-depth look at the complaint process of the Davenport Civil Rights Commission through the case of Ingleore Nabb vs. David Botsko. (See River Cities' Reader issues 503 and 505.

This article is part two of an in-depth look at the Davenport Civil Rights Commission's (DCRC) complaint process through the case of Inglore Nabb versus David Botsko. (See "Prosecutor, Judge, & Jury," Issue 503, November 17-23, 2004.