If she was that good then why only after 5 months they went and found a permenant Chief? Obviously, she proved in those five months she could not the job as chief and certainly had no business being in there as a permanent Chief of Police. I think only 9 years of experience says something about her lack of experience. This has nothing to do with being male or female as your feminist remark indicates. I am certain that people are kept in there positions a lot longer than they deserve such as Terri Oxford's case so frivolous court cases like these do not occur .
No one has said that she was not a decent police officer at least I have not read or heard anything of the likes throughout this trial from the media or the "witnesses" for either side. What is being said is that she did not make a decent police chief and when she was fired for dereliction of her duties as a Police Officer she is trying to make a case that it was because she is a female.
Maybe, it was because of her own doing and no one elses. It certainly does not make sense to me that you would keep someone employeed for 5 additional years only to fire them for being a female. I would think that that would have been done just as soon as the Chief Layne took office as to void the Christmas rush!
More information about formatting options