spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 7, 2007 4:14:39 GMT -5
Do you think this officer committed misconduct? At 4:45 am after a night of drinking and dancing at a downtown hotel, BLANK was driving with evaline and two friends. He skidded on the ice into the path of an oncoming car. " I got out of my car and went over to the other driver and told him who I was." The driver was a 21 year old machinist named Robert Sims from East Cleavland. BLANK explained that he agreed with Sims to have him follow BLANK to the hospital. When he realized that Sims was not following him, BLANK returned to the accident scene, but another motorist had already taken Sims to the hospital.
" After I got home, I immediately called the hospital and talked to someone. I wanted to make sure the injured man was all right. I said that I would have my insurance adjusters on the job in the morning."
The accident did serious injury to BLANK's reputation. The newspapers had characterized it as a "hit-skip" accident and focused on the fact that BLANK had been drinking. (info provided by http://www.crimelibrary.com)
SUBSTITUTE BLANK with Elliot Ness then Director of Public Safety in Cleavland. This goes to show that even heroes have feet of clay. What would be done today if this happened? Once again, the good old days weren't perfect.
|
|
spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 7, 2007 4:14:39 GMT -5
Do you think this officer committed misconduct? At 4:45 am after a night of drinking and dancing at a downtown hotel, BLANK was driving with evaline and two friends. He skidded on the ice into the path of an oncoming car. " I got out of my car and went over to the other driver and told him who I was." The driver was a 21 year old machinist named Robert Sims from East Cleavland. BLANK explained that he agreed with Sims to have him follow BLANK to the hospital. When he realized that Sims was not following him, BLANK returned to the accident scene, but another motorist had already taken Sims to the hospital.
" After I got home, I immediately called the hospital and talked to someone. I wanted to make sure the injured man was all right. I said that I would have my insurance adjusters on the job in the morning."
The accident did serious injury to BLANK's reputation. The newspapers had characterized it as a "hit-skip" accident and focused on the fact that BLANK had been drinking. (info provided by http://www.crimelibrary.com)
SUBSTITUTE BLANK with Elliot Ness then Director of Public Safety in Cleavland. This goes to show that even heroes have feet of clay. What would be done today if this happened? Once again, the good old days weren't perfect.
|
|
spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 7, 2007 2:43:29 GMT -5
Once again, thanks for the reply. You state " If law officers conducted themselves against the will of the people it was for selfish reasons and not at the direction of the Government (Not withstanding prohibition)." What about the enforcement of Jim Crow laws in the south from Reconstruction until the end of the Civil Rights movement? The people and the government both supported these unconstitutional laws. Local police and sheriffs enthusiastically took part in denying civil rights to millions with the support of the people, government and state law. Once again, I believe that the "good old days" weren't always so good.
You seem to be aghast that at times police officers spend their times doing things other than enforcing laws. I picked a random night on patrol from approximately 1 yr ago. Here is how my night went. I checked the security of 8 public buildings (making sure the buildings the taxpayers pay for were not vandalized or burglarized). I made 3 motor vehicle stops (2 verbals and 1 written warning). I backed up a State Police Officer on a motor vehicle stop. I broke up a loud college party (no arrests or summons needed) I responded to a medical aid of an elderly man that had fallen out of bed and cut his arm. I provided medical attention until an ambulance arrived. While not a particulary exciting night (We have those also) I feel like I earned my money and helped a few people while doing it. I enforced a few laws, I helped an elderly veteran and I checked a few buildings. I was respectful to all, friendly to a few and stern to others. I would not have hesitated to arrest the party goers if they had been underage or not dispersed when requested. I certainly wasn't friendly to this elderly man for my own protection or safety. He was a nice old guy who needed my help. His taxes pay for me to help him and I was nice to him because he was nice to me.
You ask if citations and arrests are the "report card" of a police officer. This is true to some degree. If you are doing your job you will answer calls and stop cars. This leads to citations or warnings and arrests because you uncover crimes (pretty obvious). You then state that " there is a difference between good arrests (convictions) and bad arrests (dismissals)" Just because an arrest results in a dismissal or not guilty verdict does not mean it was a bad arrest. I've had arrests where people were guilty as sin but prosecutors drop charges because victims or witnesses refuse to testify. I've had arrests where people were guilty as sin but have been aquitted because I forgot to put something in my police report, they had a great attorney or the prosecutor sucked. That is the system that we work under and I accept it. Officers who make arrests without probable cause open themselves up to civil liability and face losing their jobs and their houses. Police officers who make good arrests and testify truthfully (regardless if this helps or hurts your case) get a reputation with judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys. Just because an arrest does'nt result in a conviction does'nt mean it's a bad arrest.
Your statement that my example of the drunk driver with the headlight out is "pre-crime" is simply not true. The people of the commonwealth have determined that operating under the influence of alcohol is a crime. This person willfully drank alcoholic beverages to excess and willfully got behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. He took active steps to commit this crime (drinking to excess and operating a motor vehicle on a public way). He was lawfully detained for a civil motor vehicle infraction and his crime was discovered by a police officer who was vigilantly doing his/her job. This is not "pre-crime", it is simply crime. In your example, your son has taken no active steps to commit a crime. In my opinion the difference is crystal clear.
p.s. I wear sunglasses when it's sunny and gloves when my hands are cold just like you do.
Thanks for the dialogue,
spd49
|
|
spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 7, 2007 2:43:29 GMT -5
Once again, thanks for the reply. You state " If law officers conducted themselves against the will of the people it was for selfish reasons and not at the direction of the Government (Not withstanding prohibition)." What about the enforcement of Jim Crow laws in the south from Reconstruction until the end of the Civil Rights movement? The people and the government both supported these unconstitutional laws. Local police and sheriffs enthusiastically took part in denying civil rights to millions with the support of the people, government and state law. Once again, I believe that the "good old days" weren't always so good.
You seem to be aghast that at times police officers spend their times doing things other than enforcing laws. I picked a random night on patrol from approximately 1 yr ago. Here is how my night went. I checked the security of 8 public buildings (making sure the buildings the taxpayers pay for were not vandalized or burglarized). I made 3 motor vehicle stops (2 verbals and 1 written warning). I backed up a State Police Officer on a motor vehicle stop. I broke up a loud college party (no arrests or summons needed) I responded to a medical aid of an elderly man that had fallen out of bed and cut his arm. I provided medical attention until an ambulance arrived. While not a particulary exciting night (We have those also) I feel like I earned my money and helped a few people while doing it. I enforced a few laws, I helped an elderly veteran and I checked a few buildings. I was respectful to all, friendly to a few and stern to others. I would not have hesitated to arrest the party goers if they had been underage or not dispersed when requested. I certainly wasn't friendly to this elderly man for my own protection or safety. He was a nice old guy who needed my help. His taxes pay for me to help him and I was nice to him because he was nice to me.
You ask if citations and arrests are the "report card" of a police officer. This is true to some degree. If you are doing your job you will answer calls and stop cars. This leads to citations or warnings and arrests because you uncover crimes (pretty obvious). You then state that " there is a difference between good arrests (convictions) and bad arrests (dismissals)" Just because an arrest results in a dismissal or not guilty verdict does not mean it was a bad arrest. I've had arrests where people were guilty as sin but prosecutors drop charges because victims or witnesses refuse to testify. I've had arrests where people were guilty as sin but have been aquitted because I forgot to put something in my police report, they had a great attorney or the prosecutor sucked. That is the system that we work under and I accept it. Officers who make arrests without probable cause open themselves up to civil liability and face losing their jobs and their houses. Police officers who make good arrests and testify truthfully (regardless if this helps or hurts your case) get a reputation with judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys. Just because an arrest does'nt result in a conviction does'nt mean it's a bad arrest.
Your statement that my example of the drunk driver with the headlight out is "pre-crime" is simply not true. The people of the commonwealth have determined that operating under the influence of alcohol is a crime. This person willfully drank alcoholic beverages to excess and willfully got behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. He took active steps to commit this crime (drinking to excess and operating a motor vehicle on a public way). He was lawfully detained for a civil motor vehicle infraction and his crime was discovered by a police officer who was vigilantly doing his/her job. This is not "pre-crime", it is simply crime. In your example, your son has taken no active steps to commit a crime. In my opinion the difference is crystal clear.
p.s. I wear sunglasses when it's sunny and gloves when my hands are cold just like you do.
Thanks for the dialogue,
spd49
|
|
spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 6, 2007 2:56:34 GMT -5
Thanks for the response. I appreciate your ideas but think that you views of policing in the past are somewhat idealistic. In the past many groups (homosexuals, racial and ethnic minorities) were systematically marginalized by government and law enforcement. This still exists but is less prevalent and certainly is more scrutinized. I think police officers today are more educated, more diverse and more tolerant than those of the past.
Laws are passed by democratically elected Legislators. If the people disagree with the direction of government than they can vote people out of office. I realize that this is a somewhat idealistic view but I believe that it still holds a lot of truth. Police officers some times enforce laws. Statistics have shown that only a small portion of an officer's time is spent with criminal enforcement. The majority of time is spent on service calls i.e. medical aids, building checks, giving directions and generally assisting the public. You state that "common" police officers spend their time generating revenue. I assume that you are referring to traffic enforcement. In my state, by law, management cannot force an officer to write a fine for a civil motor vehicle infraction. Writing a ticket or a warning is always left to the officer's discretion. Ticket quotas are also illegal.
You state that there has to be an injured party for a crime to be committed. What about the following? John Jones is driving down the road drunk. He has not had an accident or hurt anyone. I stop Jones for having a headlight out. I see that Jones is drunk and arrest him for Operating under the Influence of Alcohol. There is really no injured party yet. There could be a bus load of children a mile down the street that Jones would have killed if I had not arrested him.
I believe that most police officers are honest and trustworthy. We do a difficult job very well for the most part. When I go to work, I do my best to follow the rules of the Constitution of the United States, the laws of the Commonwealth where I work and my conscience. I'm proud of what I do. I've never felt like a government lackey or oppressor of the people. When I have to take enforcement action, I do so to the fullest extent of the law and make no apologies for that.
|
|
spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 6, 2007 2:56:34 GMT -5
Thanks for the response. I appreciate your ideas but think that you views of policing in the past are somewhat idealistic. In the past many groups (homosexuals, racial and ethnic minorities) were systematically marginalized by government and law enforcement. This still exists but is less prevalent and certainly is more scrutinized. I think police officers today are more educated, more diverse and more tolerant than those of the past.
Laws are passed by democratically elected Legislators. If the people disagree with the direction of government than they can vote people out of office. I realize that this is a somewhat idealistic view but I believe that it still holds a lot of truth. Police officers some times enforce laws. Statistics have shown that only a small portion of an officer's time is spent with criminal enforcement. The majority of time is spent on service calls i.e. medical aids, building checks, giving directions and generally assisting the public. You state that "common" police officers spend their time generating revenue. I assume that you are referring to traffic enforcement. In my state, by law, management cannot force an officer to write a fine for a civil motor vehicle infraction. Writing a ticket or a warning is always left to the officer's discretion. Ticket quotas are also illegal.
You state that there has to be an injured party for a crime to be committed. What about the following? John Jones is driving down the road drunk. He has not had an accident or hurt anyone. I stop Jones for having a headlight out. I see that Jones is drunk and arrest him for Operating under the Influence of Alcohol. There is really no injured party yet. There could be a bus load of children a mile down the street that Jones would have killed if I had not arrested him.
I believe that most police officers are honest and trustworthy. We do a difficult job very well for the most part. When I go to work, I do my best to follow the rules of the Constitution of the United States, the laws of the Commonwealth where I work and my conscience. I'm proud of what I do. I've never felt like a government lackey or oppressor of the people. When I have to take enforcement action, I do so to the fullest extent of the law and make no apologies for that.
|
|
spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 5, 2007 5:19:35 GMT -5
I am a 10 yr police veteran and I am genuinely interested in what people think of the police. Here is your chance to tell a cop what you think of him and all his brothers and sisters in law enforcement.
|
|
spd49
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by spd49 on Jan 5, 2007 5:19:35 GMT -5
I am a 10 yr police veteran and I am genuinely interested in what people think of the police. Here is your chance to tell a cop what you think of him and all his brothers and sisters in law enforcement.
|
|