Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: DREDIOCK on May 03, 2007, 04:51:25 PM
-
"TRENTON — Some state troopers, feeling they have been publicly ridiculed for the accident that almost killed Gov. Jon S. Corzine, appear to be plotting a ticket blitz against the public this month, followed by a slowdown in June, according to a chilling series of anonymous online postings"
Troopers plotting Ticket blitz (http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070503/NEWS0301/705030509/1008)
Basically whats been happening is there has been a rash of State troopers and police being involved in acciidents where people have gotten killed and injured where the officer has been in the wrong.
Now. Rather then admit the officer may have been in the wrong and charging him accordingly just as you or I would be. There has been instances where months have gone by before charges of any kind have been filed. In the meantime. the states "Top cop" keeps comming out and insisting these officer have done nothing wrong.
One instance. a cop traveling at a high rate of speed and NOT on a call ran a stop sigh and killed two girls. I I had mentioned in another thread some time ago.
Whereas you ad I would have been at least ticketed almost immediately. The cop wasnt. And it was only after months.
And months of a local radio personality bringing it up that he finally was.
IN the meantime. Officials here to the public eye seemingly did everything in their power to sweep it under the rug and make it go away.
C'mon man, it doesnt take months to find out how fast a car was going and it doesnt take months to figure out if the guy was on a call or not.
In the case of the governor. The trooper in question as reported by the cars black box. was traveling in excess of 90 MPH and according to phone reords was using his cell phone while driving just prior to the accident.
Both the MPH traveled, and using a Cell phone while driving are illegal in NJ.
In fact using a cell phone while driving is now considered to be a primary offence which you can be pulled over for.
Now yes in this state troopers can drive over the speed limit if on a call of a potential emergancy. Somewhow I dont think driving the governor to meet with the Rutgers basketball team consitutes "an emergancy".
Now these guys are unhappy because this radio personality keeps bringing these things to light and the people are crying foul.
(hes the one that broke the story several days ago)
So they are throwing this little tempertantrum.
Oh its real enough. While not being ticketed myself, at least yet.
I've seen it with my own eyes.
So now today. This clown spokesman for the troopers holds an imprompto press conference and announces the personalities real name. Home address. Car type and licence plate number.
Im guesing in retaliation for his being critical of the absurd statements this clown with the troopers has been making.
What these cops cant seem to understand it that the people are sick of when a cop does something wrong not being held to the same accountability the rest of us are.
We dont begrudge when a cop drives faster then the speedlimit reguardless of reason.
The problem we have is when something goes wrong. They should have to own up and take the same responcability and its consequences as the rest of us.
and all to often that simply does not happen.
And its almost blatently arrogent in the way it doesnt happen.
As I have repeatedly stated on these boards I have all the respect int he world for cops. They do a job you couldnt pay me enough to do and god bless yas.
But there are entirely too many who seem to feel they should be above the law when something goes wrong. And entirely too may willing to participate in the Blue sheild of protection when one royally screws up.
Now I can understand how and why cops would want to protect each other and cover each others arses.
But. when people get hurt and killed. When the cop in question is obviously in the wrong.
Then all bets should be off.
After all. If we cant count on them to police each other.
How can we trust them to police us?
-
Wow you'd think that things were really bad in NJ. News has to come from an anonomous bbs. tisk tisk. I suppose it's been confirmed that everyone on that bbs was a trooper? :p
Now I just got this sent to me by another person I know. He isn't a Cop and has never been in Law Enforcement. He just saw a funny and passed it on to a bunch of his buddies from his military and flying background. I wonder if it's true a true story, after all it's anonomous...........:p
A motorcycle officer stops a man for running a red light. The guy is a real jerk and comes running back to the officer. The violator demands to know why he is being harassed by the Gestapo! So the officer calmly tells him of the red light violation. The motorist instantly goes on a tirade, questioning the officer's ancestry, sexual orientation, etc., in rather explicit terms. The officer, being a professional, takes it all in stride, figuring "battleship mouth and rowboat ass."
The tirade goes on without the cop saying anything. When he gets done with writing the citation he puts an "AH" in the lower right corner of the narrative portion of the citation. He then hands it to the violator for his signature.
The guy signs the cite angrily, tearing the paper, and when presented his copy, points to the "AH" and demands to know what it stands for. The officer then removes his mirrored sunglasses, gets in the middle of the guy's face and said, "That's so when we go to court, I'll remember you're an *******!"
Three months later they are in court. The violator has such a bad record he is about to lose his license and has hired an attorney to represent him.
On the stand the officer testifies to seeing the man run the red light. Under cross-examination, the defense attorney asks, "Officer, is this a reasonable facsimile of the citation you issued my client?"
Officer responds, "Yes sir, this is the defendant's copy, his signature and mine, same number at the top."
Attorney: "Officer, is there any particular marking or notation on this citation you don't normally make?"
Officer: "Yes sir, in the lower right corner of the narrative there is an 'AH,' underlined."
Attorney: "What does the AH stand for, officer?"
Officer: "Aggressive and Hostile, Sir."
Attorney: "Aggressive and hostile?"
Officer: "Yes, Sir?"
Attorney: "Officer, are you sure it doesn't stand for '*******'?"
Officer: "Well, Sir, you know your client better than I do!"
-
Originally posted by Maverick
snip
Officer: "Well, Sir, you know your client better than I do!"
Next line in the text buffer:
A kill has been recorded.
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Wow you'd think that things were really bad in NJ. News has to come from an anonomous bbs. tisk tisk. I suppose it's been confirmed that everyone on that bbs was a trooper? :p
You cant get on that BBS unless you are a trooper.
Its a true story.
I provided the link for the source
Obviously someone in the position to know seemed to think so and took it seriously enough
"But State Police Superintendent Col. Joseph "Rick" Fuentes took the postings seriously enough to order commanders to try to make sure troopers don't launch the ticket storm. "He made it clear to the command staff, what is posted there he won't tolerate," said Capt. Al Della Fave, spokesman for the patrol"
-
Drediock,
Don't bother with him.. he's one of them after all (every time defending cops), and like you've noticed, it's hard for the cops' ego to admit they have done something unlawful.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
..... like you've noticed, it's hard for the cops' ego to admit they have done something unlawful.
Sometimes the judges fail to admit the cops have done something unlawful as well:
Been a rash of police ticketing motorcyclists using HOV lanes. Thing is, if ANY Federal funds were used in the construction or maintenance of the hiway the HOV lane is on (which is about all of them), part of the Federal requirement is motorcycle access to those HOV lanes (motorcycles seen as taking very little space and good fuel mileage, so seen as a benefit to traffic flow, parking spaces, and encouraged by HOV lane use).
Several of these tickets have been fought in court, in places like Pennsylvania, among others (Jersy is one I IIRC as well), and upheld.... despite not being against state or federal laws.
-
Simple solution is to send the troopers back to safe driving school. I can recommend one in Rochester, if they need.
-
Police should not be held to the same standards as the rest of us. They should be held to a higher standard. They are entrusted to uphold the law and serve the public. Violating that trust is not a perk of the job.
-
Fishu, you wouldn't know that unless you'd been a cop yourself. That, and reading between Mav's lines, on the internet... cultural differences are not likely to help clear communication or accurate interpretation on your part.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Officer: "Well, Sir, you know your client better than I do!"
LMAO (we used to write AH on vehicle registrations)
When people would go off on some extended whine about a cite, proclaiming they'll see me in court, I'd tell them I can use the OT to help pay off my boat and I'd appreciate it if they did contest the ticket.
So in court the dude would ask me a bunch of stupid questions, followed by a stupid speech to the judge decrying:
"Your honor!! this officer told me only gave me a ticket for the OT $$to pay off his boat!"
Judge looks at me, "Is this true?.. officer??", I respond truthfully "well your honor... I don't own a boat"
-
Originally posted by rpm
Police should not be held to the same standards as the rest of us. They should be held to a higher standard. They are entrusted to uphold the law and serve the public. Violating that trust is not a perk of the job.
Depends on what standard, like it or not police officers are looked upon as public assets. To hire 3 cops you need 100 applicants, then theres the academy / training and all that.. it takes a lot of tax payer dollars to put a cop on the street.
Then there's the officer in question, the DAs and courts take into consideration how many lives s/hes saved, bad guys put in prison and the over all record (value) of that officer... there are times, like with traffic collisions, "they" decide although the officer was a fault it wouldn't be in the communities best interest to fire him / her.
Cops running into people is the cost of doing business sometimes, its recognized that officers do a lot of driving, emergency and otherwise, and over the course of a 20 year career accidents will happen. Its a tough business and bad things happen to good cops.
This doest mean there's no punishment, when courts allow depts to handle cases administratively guys can get MONTHS off, demoted, re assigned... they pay for it, just not the way some people in the civilian world would like.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Cops running into people is the cost of doing business sometimes, its recognized that officers do a lot of driving, emergency and otherwise, and over the course of a 20 year career accidents will happen. Its a tough business and bad things happen to good cops.
This doest mean there's no punishment, when courts allow depts to handle cases administratively guys can get MONTHS off, demoted, re assigned... they pay for it, just not the way some people in the civilian world would like.
Yes accidents will happen
And I dont think many people would begrudge them that.
But
When things happen that seriously injure or kill people. And its undeniably obvious that the officer screwed up. All any of us want is for that person have to man up and face the same consequences that we would have to make.
The one thing we certainly do not want. is for the department of the official spokesman to come out saying as in the case of the two girls "He was on a call" when the records show he wasnt. "He wasnt speeding" when the black box says he was.
THEN when only after months charges are filed to continue to stand behind the offending officer and blatantly say "the officer did nothing wrong"
when the facts show otherwise and as a result two people are dead.
Well thats just infuriating
Or in the case with the governor "Speed had nothing to do with the accident" Sorry but 91 MPH in a suburban during the afternoon hours when people are starting to get off of and come home from work is too fast on a highway unless there is a dire emergancy no matter whom is in the car. To say that speed wasnt a factor when the vehicle in question was going 91 MPH is an insult to just about anyones inelegance.
Then he comes out and claims the driver not only "wasnt using a cell phone". but "didnt even have one". And it comes out that not only did he have one but he was using it just prior to the accident.
These are the types of things that irritate the bejesus out of the public.
this is where the Blue shield of protection goes entirely too far
If they just came out from the get go and said "ok this guy did this or that and will be issued this summons or that" There would be no public outcry.
But failing to do that gives us the impression that law enforcement feels they are above and immune to the law.
And that ticks the public off.
Then when people get ticked off and complain about it. A bunch of cops decide to do something like what is in the original post.
To us that just smacks of arrogance and ego and abuse of power.
Its a temper tantrum and nothing less. In which case. Who protects us against them??
Now I dont think anyone wants to see the laws so stringently enforced that people, including cops are going ot get nailed to a cross on every little thing.
But, by the same token if by chance a cop screws up and people get SERIOUSLY hurt or die. We just want them to take the same lumps as the rest of us would regardless of the public good we to may do.
If I were a doctor and I had saved countless lives. And I sped,ran a stop sign and killed two people. Or I while traveling at a high rate of speed well above the posted limit,during the beginning of rush hour,was also shown to be talking on a cell phone and got into an accident that put one of my passengers who wasnt wearing a seat belt on the critical list.
I would still be charged.
Thats all we are expecting.
I personally dont feel its an unreasonable expectation
As much of a butt wipe as I think he is. At least the governor had them issue him a citation for not wearing a seatbelt which he promptly paid.
Now it can be said there was public pressure to do so. And one citizen did file a complaint to issue him one when it became apperent the state was not going to dispite all their touting of "Click it or Ticket" Zero Tolerance" policy.
It is entirely probable that he succumbed to public pressure. But I'd say give him a pass on that one inasmuch as he was in the critical list for a week.
But at least he owned up to it, accepted his ticket. just like the rest of us would have to. and paid it.
Now its a non issue.
Nobody is looking to begrudge cops some of the things they do even if they arent technically supposed to be doing them such as speeding,running red lights etc when not on a call.
People by and large would just as soon give them a pass just as we would like ot be given a pass on occasion.
BUT. If in the process of doing these things they arent technically supposed to be doing.. (Lets face it. EVERYONE speeds now and again)Something goes terribly wrong and it is because of the things they were doing wrong that it happened.
Dont cover it up and lie and claim "they did nothing wrong" when its painfully obviously they did
Accept and face the consequences just as the rest of us have to.
Like I said.
I dont think that is an unreasonable expectation.
This "Ticket blitz" is ridiculous and these guys just dont get it. they feel under attack but they dont get what it is they are under attack about.
Nobody has said they do a bad job. We just hate when one of them isnt in our eyes held to the same accountability as the rest of us when we have done the same thing. nothing more, Nothing less We dont want private in house disciplinary action. then we dont know and to us it looks as if none has been taken at all.
And we HATE being lied to by spokes people with claims of "He did nothing wrong" when we all know its a lie.
THAT is where our gripe is
-
Cops have among them the worst drivers in the world. They have killed many innocent people due to the arrogant nature of their driving. I have known a few cops that basically seemed to honestly believe that the law didn't apply to them.
Not all are like that, but even a few is too many.
Sadly that is why police agencies need oversight by people who are not police.
-
I wouldnt think that their ticket blitz is going to go far, they would be asking for trouble.
With so many folks carrying time stamp vidio and photo gear with them these days, I don't think the troopers would want all of their activities compared to run sheets and dispatch tickets.
If they were were doing it in my area, I would make it my hobby to burn a few of them.
shamus
-
Originally posted by rpm
Police should not be held to the same standards as the rest of us. They should be held to a higher standard. They are entrusted to uphold the law and serve the public. Violating that trust is not a perk of the job.
Well said. :aok
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Yes accidents will happen
And I dont think many people would begrudge them that.
But
When things happen that seriously injure or kill people. And its undeniably obvious that the officer screwed up. All any of us want is for that person have to man up and face the same consequences that we would have to make.
And I telling you it doesn't work that way, theres no answer here you're going to like. Some cops are valuable community assets and it doest serve the public's interest to fire them in every case.
A Sgt I used to work for killed 1 & put 1 in a wheelchair responding to an emergency call.. he was at fault. During his 15 year career he received medals of valor for saving lives, real dramatic burning building stuff that earned him the title "hero", twice. He was also recognized as of the nations leading experts in crimes related the occult, hes been on loan to the FBI, ATF as well as dozens of other depts and was responsible for putting away the type of criminal you pray never comes into contact with anyone you know / care about.
This was his 1st duty related accident in 12 years.
It was decided he shouldn't be fired and the courts allowed the dept to handle it administratively; he was demoted (loss $$), rotated to a desk while on probation for 9 months, and received 30 days off without pay. Last I knew was being sued for every penny he had, he was punished.
Lots of people out there can be arrested for some cheap poop, charged, or wipe out a few people in a crosswalk, receive probation and have no worries about losing their career as a result, why should cops be so drastically different? they swore to uphold the law, not be "poop happens" mistake free.
-
We're talking about the cops who injure people when they're NOT on a call. It is completely understandable that accidents do happen for the cops, but not when the leading cause of an accident was due to recklessness of a cop.
Everyone is abided by the traffic laws; When a cop is not on a call he's expected to follow the same rules in the traffic as the rest of us. In the case of an accident, where the driver was in violation of the law, the background of a person can't be a reason to not punish reckless driving. The background could be used to mitigate the punishment, but it should not be a "jail free" card. There are lots of people out there, not just the cops, who's done alot of good. It shouldn't be the privilege of the privileged alone.
The cop in Marine's post was on a call when the accident happened. In the light of the post, if nothing crucial was left out that lead to the punishment, the cop shouldn't been punished. He was following the law and was not an example of a reckless cop, he and the victim had tough luck. Those things do happen and it's always very unfortunate. However, reckless driving when not on a call is inexcusable, especially for an officer who's duty is to defend the law.
The badge carries a responsibility. If we can't trust the holder of the badge to follow the law, then why should we?
-
Originally posted by Fishu
We're talking about the cops who injure people when they're NOT on a call. It is completely understandable that accidents do happen for the cops, but not when the leading cause of an accident was due to recklessness of a cop.
Everyone is abided by the traffic laws; When a cop is not on a call he's expected to follow the same rules in the traffic as the rest of us. In the case of an accident, where the driver was in violation of the law, the background of a person can't be a reason to not punish reckless driving. The background could be used to mitigate the punishment, but it should not be a "jail free" card. There are lots of people out there, not just the cops, who's done alot of good. It shouldn't be the privilege of the privileged alone.
The cop in Marine's post was on a call when the accident happened. In the light of the post, if nothing crucial was left out that lead to the punishment, the cop shouldn't been punished. He was following the law and was not an example of a reckless cop, he and the victim had tough luck. Those things do happen and it's always very unfortunate. However, reckless driving when not on a call is inexcusable, especially for an officer who's duty is to defend the law.
The badge carries a responsibility. If we can't trust the holder of the badge to follow the law, then why should we?
On call or not, its the idea of being "on duty", cops make observations, not related to calls, that might require some emergency type driving. Police officers have a bill of rights all their own that don't apply to you, in Cali its "AB301 rights". Lawmakers have recognized that cops are in a tough business, stuff happens and those sworn to protect others receive special considerations that are written into law.. I'm sorry you guys don't like it, but that's reality.
Reckless or untrustworthy officers usually get washed out, fired or run off relatively quickly in this business, long before they screw up and get in an unfortunate traffic accident, which as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.
A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever.. has a lot to do with the officers additional rights, due process, and long standing legal precedents and understandings between the courts / DAs / local cities and the nature of police business.
Trying to explain to some of you guys how exactly things of this type work, is like trying to teach law on a BBS.. there are just too many rules, laws, regulations, policies, procedures and such to cover... which also happen to differ from state to state.
Suffice it to say some you guys just dont like the way it is, and no explanation is going to change that.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.
A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up,
let me give you a clue, the job of a cop, what we pay them for, is to protect the citizens, or as you call them "outsiders", not to kill the citizens,
you don't like the job , get a different one.
-
Eloquent presentation, Drediock.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
And I telling you it doesn't work that way, theres no answer here you're going to like. Some cops are valuable community assets and it doest serve the public's interest to fire them in every case.
A Sgt I used to work for killed 1 & put 1 in a wheelchair responding to an emergency call.. he was at fault. During his 15 year career he received medals of valor for saving lives, real dramatic burning building stuff that earned him the title "hero", twice. He was also recognized as of the nations leading experts in crimes related the occult, hes been on loan to the FBI, ATF as well as dozens of other depts and was responsible for putting away the type of criminal you pray never comes into contact with anyone you know / care about.
This was his 1st duty related accident in 12 years.
It was decided he shouldn't be fired and the courts allowed the dept to handle it administratively; he was demoted (loss $$), rotated to a desk while on probation for 9 months, and received 30 days off without pay. Last I knew was being sued for every penny he had, he was punished.
Lots of people out there can be arrested for some cheap poop, charged, or wipe out a few people in a crosswalk, receive probation and have no worries about losing their career as a result, why should cops be so drastically different? they swore to uphold the law, not be "poop happens" mistake free.
I never once said to fire them.
Just give the guy the same summons/charges we would get.
Most people wouldn't necessarily be fired either.
But we would have to accept the summons/charges and go through the due process.
How much of a hero one is or was is irrelevant
Its supposed to be equal justice under the law.
Not equal justice cept for those that are a little more equal then others
In your case its a different story. he was on a call.
So really we're talking apples and oranges
I have no problem with the outcome in THAT instance.
When your on an emergency call yea. Things can happen.
When your not.
Sorry but there is no excuse and no room for that kind of "mistake"
When your not on a call. You should be just as reasonable , and just as accountable as the rest of us.
Or none of us should be reasonable or accountable either.
Anything less places you above the law.
And your not.
but still by your "to uphold the law, not be "poop happens" mistake free. "argument
Then neither should the rest of us be when someone is maimed or killed
After all we arent mistake free either.
I want to be clear. This isnt a rant against cops per se. I wholly support cops. And when things happen during the course of an emergency. I can understand. I think most people can.
My beef is when NOT on an emergency call. Again I will site the Governor, and the two girls.
In neither instance was there an "emergency situation"
In those instances there simply is no excuse
and the public has every right to be critical and cry foul in those instances.
And in those instances Cops need to understand it IS NOT an attack on cops in their entirety. But on the individual cop/s in question.
Because we are outraged when things like this happen just like we are outraged when Joe Shmo does them
And therein lies the problem.
A lot of cops. (generally speaking) take it as an attack on the force as a whole whenever a compliant is voiced about an individual.
And that ticks people off and thats how respect is lost because more often then not that isnt the case at all.
The complaint is usually about one specific cop in particular.
In this instance the public has a problem with a series of incidents that involved officers NOT on an emergency call. Incidents where the ones in question were clearly in the wrong.
Yet we get this clown spokes person coming out in press conferences swearing the ones in question did nothing wrong and stand by them 100%. when everyone KNOWS its a crock. So people howl a that.
So what happens These troopers on the board get all pissed off cause they think the entire force is being attacked rather then just the ones in question and the idiot spokes person.
So they decide they are going to fight back and take it out on everyone.
Thats BS. And thats the kind of thing that causes the people to cry out about the force as a whole.
Al they had to do was recognize that one of their own screwed up.
That's all the spokes person had to do was say "Hey, he screwed up and a summons will be issued and disciplinary actions will be taken." from the get go.
Woulda been end of story. No public outcry. no media criticism cept for maybe that particular officer. and that woulda been it. It would have in effect neutered the entire situation
But no. They couldn't do that. And in not doing that they bring about the very thing they are ticked off about.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
On call or not, its the idea of being "on duty", cops make observations, not related to calls, that might require some emergency type driving. Police officers have a bill of rights all their own that don't apply to you, in Cali its "AB301 rights". Lawmakers have recognized that cops are in a tough business, stuff happens and those sworn to protect others receive special considerations that are written into law.. I'm sorry you guys don't like it, but that's reality.
Reckless or untrustworthy officers usually get washed out, fired or run off relatively quickly in this business, long before they screw up and get in an unfortunate traffic accident, which as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.
A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever.. has a lot to do with the officers additional rights, due process, and long standing legal precedents and understandings between the courts / DAs / local cities and the nature of police business.
Trying to explain to some of you guys how exactly things of this type work, is like trying to teach law on a BBS.. there are just too many rules, laws, regulations, policies, procedures and such to cover... which also happen to differ from state to state.
Suffice it to say some you guys just dont like the way it is, and no explanation is going to change that.
Then I'd have to say that law. that special bill lof rights. Is in dire need of being rewritten
"A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever"
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck etc etc.
What your discribing then is legalised rug sweeping and coverupping LOL
Sorry, you shoudnt get a free pass just for being on duty
-
Ok. so explian to me how this officers "special bill of rights"
Applies here
"Corzine, late for a meeting between radio host Don Imus and the Rutgers women's basketball team, was not wearing a seat belt as he rode in the front seat.
According to an Associated Press survey of travel policies nationwide, governors' drivers - who are state law enforcement officers - are expected to obey traffic and safety laws and not to speed or use warning lights just because their bosses are running late or want to get somewhere quicker"
"Officials in several states reported having no written policy on gubernatorial transport, with some saying they preferred that their executive protection unit have discretion while driving the governor. Some, citing security concerns, would not discuss transport protocol. No state agreed to share its complete policy.
In New Jersey, members of the governor's executive protection unit are trained to increase speed and activate flashing lights when necessary, although they are expected to obey traffic laws in non-emergencies, according to State Police Superintendent Col. Rick Fuentes."
And whats this guys excuse?
http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770503058 (http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770503058)
"State Police union leader David Jones said more motorists have been confrontational during traffic stops since Carton, and then Gannett New Jersey newspapers, publicized the chatter about stepped-up ticket writing, which anonymous posters discussed on a password-protected message board for union members.
Jones held a paper with Carton's home information in front of him for the duration of his remarks.
"I'm going to release the names and addresses of these people and then their sponsors, and all of the car dealerships and everybody else that sponsors that show is going to have to deal with the reality that they're putting public servants and the public in general in harm's way," Jones said.
He said there is no ticket-writing campaign occurring and threatened to "crush" the people who leaked the anonymous posts to the media."
He says there isnt. But the fact remains its happening
-
The badge carries a responsibility. If we can't trust the holder of the badge to follow the law, then why should we?
Fishu, are all cops irresponsible and are there any officers that you do trust?
Just one somewhere maybe?
-
Human nature is defensive. I have little doubt that cops often feel unappreciated by the public but do have doubt that there is any organized effort to retaliate against a perceived slight.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Depends on what standard, like it or not police officers are looked upon as public assets. To hire 3 cops you need 100 applicants, then theres the academy / training and all that.. it takes a lot of tax payer dollars to put a cop on the street.
Then there's the officer in question, the DAs and courts take into consideration how many lives s/hes saved, bad guys put in prison and the over all record (value) of that officer... there are times, like with traffic collisions, "they" decide although the officer was a fault it wouldn't be in the communities best interest to fire him / her.
Cops running into people is the cost of doing business sometimes, its recognized that officers do a lot of driving, emergency and otherwise, and over the course of a 20 year career accidents will happen. Its a tough business and bad things happen to good cops.
This doest mean there's no punishment, when courts allow depts to handle cases administratively guys can get MONTHS off, demoted, re assigned... they pay for it, just not the way some people in the civilian world would like.
That is completely and totally wrong. Are the victims and their families suppossed to feel better because they were the "cost of doing business"? That's the most ludicrous statement I've ever read.
Just because their buddies will give them "professional courtesy" does not mean thay are not responsable for their actions. A vacation from work is not punishment. Oh, the poor guy has to work at WalMart for 2 months. How horrid!!
Cops are not "special citizens".
Bad things happen to good truck drivers, too. They get no special treatment or consideration for the 1000's of lives they supported delivering their loads everyday spending weeks at a time away from their families.
-
Police Chief in Wisconcin (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12784367/)
I think it's more a problem of the "cover up" than the actual incedent. Put the officer on administrative leave or somthing for a few days and problem solved.
Think of some other jobs where someone screws up and everything's fine, no punishment. If this happened in a delivery truck, would the company let it go?
wrngway
-
Originally posted by rpm
That is completely and totally wrong. Are the victims and their families suppossed to feel better because they were the "cost of doing business"? That's the most ludicrous statement I've ever read.
Just because their buddies will give them "professional courtesy" does not mean thay are not responsable for their actions. A vacation from work is not punishment. Oh, the poor guy has to work at WalMart for 2 months. How horrid!!
Cops are not "special citizens".
Bad things happen to good truck drivers, too. They get no special treatment or consideration for the 1000's of lives they supported delivering their loads everyday spending weeks at a time away from their families.
Nobody said cops are "special citizens" (they are sworn public servants), but they do have their own rights... like it or not; AB301 in Ca. Professional courtesy, 99% of the time, is using ones discretion not to cite a fellow officer, "professional consideration" is what cops might get from the DA / courts.
Truck drivers?, it doesn't take 100 applicants to hire 3 truck drivers, call a truck driver next time a burglar breaks into your home, or some cluck punks you in front of your girl and jacks your ride... maybe the value of a cop will become clearer.
A truck driver kills someone in an accident, his / her driving & criminal record will be taken into account, same with cops... cops who saved lives and catch killers for a living have these facts considered (see: professional consideration above)
There are a-lot more things than the "cost of doing business" that I promise you wont like... look into asset seizure, but if you'd like to me to sugar coat reality so its more palatable.. LMK. I can give you the nice for public consumption version.
People can die when a good cop makes a bad mistake because thats the nature of the business.. nobody can be perfect all of the time.
-
Things are not uniform all the way across the country. One of the lessons that was taught in the academy was comparative operations. Once you cross the Mississippi things are way different from the Western side of the country. Graft, corruption, "favors" are far more prevalent there. Looking at N.O. and Chicago are pretty good examples. Things go on there that would be sensational news on the West coast or just in the West period. I'm not saying it's good, it's just what I was told and has been confirmed by observation.
As far as "professional courtesy" is concerned it is also different. I was cited for speeding by a trooper in my home state. I deserved the ticket and paid it. No big deal at all. I've also cited other Officers when I felt it was appropriate and even filed a complaint against a Federal Agent as well as writing him a ticket. I've let others go and I've let plain old joe citizen go at times. Attitude counts a lot at times. If you wanted to bite my bellybutton and use your "freedom of speech" to abuse me I was hardly likely to hand out a warning. Someone who said yep they screwed up and were sorry was a candidate for a warning, even when I was a Motor. I gave some latitude for the few "adult" drivers I found.
A prime example of "courtesy" between Prosecutors (for Superior Court) and Cops is this. In Arizona it is a felony to commit an assault on a Peace Officer (or Prosecutor). The statute does not have an injury classification, it just states that if you assault them you are prosecuted for a felony. When I was still working, the prosecutors office had a set "unwritten" standard that if the Cop did not get injured sufficiently admitted to the hospital for at least overnight there would be no prosecution for aggravated assault (the felony charge) as long as there was no knife or gun involved. We had folks get broken bones and other injuries that cost them time off work, sometimes significant time, and the prosecutors office would not prosecute for the assault. They remanded it to misdemeanor court. It didn't matter that the Officer arrested the suspect for the felony, the prosecutors office refused to file on it at court or take it to a grand jury.
Later on, one of the prosecutors got spit upon by a defendant at court and of course filed the felony.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
On call or not, its the idea of being "on duty", cops make observations, not related to calls, that might require some emergency type driving. Police officers have a bill of rights all their own that don't apply to you, in Cali its "AB301 rights". Lawmakers have recognized that cops are in a tough business, stuff happens and those sworn to protect others receive special considerations that are written into law.. I'm sorry you guys don't like it, but that's reality.
Reckless or untrustworthy officers usually get washed out, fired or run off relatively quickly in this business, long before they screw up and get in an unfortunate traffic accident, which as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.
A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever.. has a lot to do with the officers additional rights, due process, and long standing legal precedents and understandings between the courts / DAs / local cities and the nature of police business.
Trying to explain to some of you guys how exactly things of this type work, is like trying to teach law on a BBS.. there are just too many rules, laws, regulations, policies, procedures and such to cover... which also happen to differ from state to state.
Suffice it to say some you guys just dont like the way it is, and no explanation is going to change that.
My neighbor growing up is a Chief of two cities in Metro Detroit, and his son (my best friend) is a SWAT officer in another city and now works in conjunction with the DEA. Cops DO and will CONTINUE "to stick together". Saying otherwise, is hilarious. I'm not an "outsider", funny you use that term.
-
People can die when a good cop makes a bad mistake because thats the nature of the business.. nobody can be perfect all of the time.
And when Joe/Jane citizen makes a mistake because nobody can be perfect all the time, it's manslaughter.
Truck drivers?, it doesn't take 100 applicants to hire 3 truck drivers, call a truck driver next time a burglar breaks into your home, or some cluck punks you in front of your girl and jacks your ride... maybe the value of a cop will become clearer.
This statement implies that cops are somehow more valuable, or better than the rest of us. A bad cop doesn't necessarily have to be corrupt to be considered bad by me, sometimes it's their crappy attitude towards Joe/Jane citizen that earns them the title *Bad Cop*.
Cops DO and will CONTINUE "to stick together".
I used to know a reservist for the Aurora PD. He and I talked at length about various subjects concerning the police, one of them being how cops stick together. He said that Aurora police officers talked to him about this all the time, sometimes in subtle ways, and some not so subtle ways. He was just a reservist trying to get on full time.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Truck drivers?, it doesn't take 100 applicants to hire 3 truck drivers, call a truck driver next time a burglar breaks into your home, or some cluck punks you in front of your girl and jacks your ride... maybe the value of a cop will become clearer.
a truck driver would get there quicker, if you want someone to show up after the fact and fill out a report call a cop.
and if your "cluck" tries to "punk" me he will be looking down the barrel of my 38.
-
When my brother was a cop on evening shift I would go riding with him once in a while. Several times when I was waiting for him to finish with reports for the night, I would hear some of the other cops telling each other things that they had gotten away with in thier off duty hours because they flashed thier badge. Things like speeding, running redlights/stop signs, etc. I heard one cop telling how he and a fellow cop got pulled over for racing and he flashed his badge and the cop that pulled him over just turned and walked away grumbling " I should have known it was a po-po". What got me was they laughed and joked about getting out of the very things thier so eager to chase "the others" down for that they claim thier life is "put on the line".