Question for LEOs

[CMike11]

Obviously police officers have a tremendous amount of power over citizens.

They can arrest them, put them in jail, and basically destroy their lives, sometimes based on their "word".

What training and checks are there for this unjustly happening?

Thank you,

[jimjames418]

There are two types of people who will post in this thread, besides me.

One group will tear your arms off for even asking the question and the second group will beat you over the head with your bloody arms.

Most LEO's must attend and pass an academy class on law enforcement, which teaches them how to perform their duties as police officers without going overboard. The class usually runs six to nine weeks.

However some departments do not require this training.

[notluzn]

If your a Man, you're screwed... If you're a Hot woman with nice assets you're free to go. Keep it safe

[JenyEliza]

There are two types of people who will post in this thread, besides me.

One group will tear your arms off for even asking the question and the second group will beat you over the head with your bloody arms.

Yep. Exactly.

Most LEO's must attend and pass an academy class on law enforcement, which teaches them how to perform their duties as police officers without going overboard. The class usually runs six to nine weeks.

However some departments do not require this training.

6-9 weeks training -- and then turned loose on the general public, with the power to absolutely DESTROY a persons's life, or worse yet kill them?

Wow. I had no idea. :doh:

I had more training than that when I was a Secretary, and nobody's life was endangered if I screwed up.

[jungulator]

More like 2-3 months acadamy time, then another 3-6 months with a training officer if I remember right. And on top of that I think you are on probation the whole first year.

[MrShotShot]

What training and checks are there for this unjustly happening?

Thank you,

Checks? Oh about fifteen gajillion lawyers.

[F9thRet]

As A LEO, I must admit, I never attended any law enforcement classes. Mostly I utilize my star charts before making an arrest. Oh and watch out for the Taurus, they are shifty.

Stephen

[signcut]

The law is the tool that the LEO uses to wield the power that even the President doesn't have, that to deprive someone of their liberty, but it is also the restraint that can be against them.

[akuma]

Obviously police officers have a tremendous amount of power over citizens.

They can arrest them, put them in jail, and basically destroy their lives, sometimes based on their "word".

What training and checks are there for this unjustly happening?

Thank you,

what training do they get to ruin your life? none

what "check" is there against your life getting ruined over the "word" of an officer- its called a Trial.

i am trying hard to think of some way your life can be ruined on just the word of an officer though....

[terri910]

i am trying hard to think of some way your life can be ruined on just the word of an officer though....
http://forums.hannity.com/showpost.php?p=54891281&postcount=9

[JenyEliza]

http://forums.hannity.com/showpost.php?p=54891281&postcount=9

Yep. And my Mom is only one of many over the years who've been through this kind of torture.

The thin blue line covers for their own. It is an unwritten rule. It has been exposed over and over and over again, and yet it still exists and justice is rarely had for the innocent victims of this "code of conduct".

To wit: Kathryn Johnston in Atlanta, GA. She was the 98 year old great-great-grandmother who was shot dead in her living room. While she was handcuffed to a piece of furniture and left to bleed out while the cops who killed her conspired to cover up their actions. They planted marijuana in her house to justify their bogus no-knock warrant--and ultimatley her murder.

After a lot of high-pressure exposure and publicity, the vice sqauad was exposed as dirty. It was dismantled and the officers involved were "prosecuted", but mostly they cut deals.

Not a single one of the officers involved got more than 12 years for her cold blooded murder--which happened because they were dirty cops.

This is justice?

WHY do Americans tolerate this crap? This is not the tyranny our country was founded on.

[terri910]

Yep.
One doesn't really have to think all THAT hard to think of some way a life could be ruined by just the word of an officer.

Do we have checks and balances? Yes, and thank God for them. Do they work 100% of the time? No way.


Which, although not TOTALLY related reminds me just the same: I saw Hannity's show the other night and he had Mike Farrell on. Sean said that he has (or is close to) changing his stance on the Death Penalty because of the number of cases where it has been proven that the person convicted did not commit the crime.

[OldSchoolConservative]

Should cops have to attend a military style boot camp like military members do? I think it would do a great job of weeding out the weak minded and those who are only trying to become a LEO because of an inferiority complex from earlier in life. But the problem with that argument is that 90 percent of cops are good integrity filled people.
It is the other ten percent that give cops a bad name. Not to mention making cops go through a military style bootcamp would be overkill.
I know in the state I live in to basically become a local cop or sheriff one just needs to attend the 6 week course at the local community college.

[CaptPops]

Obviously police officers have a tremendous amount of power over citizens.

They can arrest them, put them in jail, and basically destroy their lives, sometimes based on their "word".

What training and checks are there for this unjustly happening?

Thank you,

Back in the 60s, there were those who called the cops pigs. etc. The answer to them was--when you have a problem, call a hippie to help you...

[CMike11]

I wasn't criticizing anyone in the OP.

I am just askin'...

[CMike11]

Are arrests reviewed by a supervisor?

[neoINDIE]

Yep. Exactly.



6-9 weeks training -- and then turned loose on the general public, with the power to absolutely DESTROY a persons's life, or worse yet kill them?

Wow. I had no idea. :doh:

I had more training than that when I was a Secretary, and nobody's life was endangered if I screwed up.

Yeah, we are out there to kill people, not protect them. :rolleyes:

Personally 21weeks of intensive classroom training followed by 15 weeks of having an experienced officer riding with you.

[neoINDIE]

Are arrests reviewed by a supervisor?

EVERYTHING is reviewed by a supervisor.

[neoINDIE]

As A LEO, I must admit, I never attended any law enforcement classes. Mostly I utilize my star charts before making an arrest. Oh and watch out for the Taurus, they are shifty.

Stephen

I prefer the magic 8-ball.

[neoINDIE]

Yep. And my Mom is only one of many over the years who've been through this kind of torture.

The thin blue line covers for their own. It is an unwritten rule. It has been exposed over and over and over again, and yet it still exists and justice is rarely had for the innocent victims of this "code of conduct".

To wit: Kathryn Johnston in Atlanta, GA. She was the 98 year old great-great-grandmother who was shot dead in her living room. While she was handcuffed to a piece of furniture and left to bleed out while the cops who killed her conspired to cover up their actions. They planted marijuana in her house to justify their bogus no-knock warrant--and ultimatley her murder.

After a lot of high-pressure exposure and publicity, the vice sqauad was exposed as dirty. It was dismantled and the officers involved were "prosecuted", but mostly they cut deals.

Not a single one of the officers involved got more than 12 years for her cold blooded murder--which happened because they were dirty cops.

This is justice?

WHY do Americans tolerate this crap? This is not the tyranny our country was founded on.

So do you hate ALL cops?

[akuma]

Yep. And my Mom is only one of many over the years who've been through this kind of torture.

The thin blue line covers for their own. It is an unwritten rule. It has been exposed over and over and over again, and yet it still exists and justice is rarely had for the innocent victims of this "code of conduct".

To wit: Kathryn Johnston in Atlanta, GA. She was the 98 year old great-great-grandmother who was shot dead in her living room. While she was handcuffed to a piece of furniture and left to bleed out while the cops who killed her conspired to cover up their actions. They planted marijuana in her house to justify their bogus no-knock warrant--and ultimatley her murder.

After a lot of high-pressure exposure and publicity, the vice sqauad was exposed as dirty. It was dismantled and the officers involved were "prosecuted", but mostly they cut deals.

Not a single one of the officers involved got more than 12 years for her cold blooded murder--which happened because they were dirty cops.

This is justice?

WHY do Americans tolerate this crap? This is not the tyranny our country was founded on.

http://forums.hannity.com/showpost.php?p=54891281&postcount=9

while both of thse events are tragic - they arent based SOLEY on the word of a cop-

the event in Atlanta was the result of cops trying to cover up their **** up - which was exposed by who else? other cops.

and while the event where the patrol car crash resulted in the death of the officer - how did the civillian of the pickup truck get some raw deal? if any thing he got a break - you arent allowed to drive drunk and a BAC of .013 if its not over the limit is pretty damn close ( NY is a BAC of .008)

if i am not mistaken Shia Le Beauf ( of Transofmers fame) was just in such a situation where someone hit him and even though he didnt cause the accident - he still was punished because he was operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

now not to nit pick but the question was " can just eh word of a LAw enforcement officer ruin your life - no maybe it can get you a ticket or lean the weight of other evidence against you more.

aside from maybe traffic court - i am hard pressed to find any situation where a cops only evidence is what he says and that only based on what he says will that result in some legal punishment.

and if youre life is ruined by losing or being taken to traffic court - you need to get get a life.

[akuma]

Are arrests reviewed by a supervisor?

in NY they are reviewd by a assistant district attorney who makes a determination whether to actually prosecute you for a crime that you have alleged to have committed and that you are arested for.

in all i am pretty sure EVERY arrest is reviewed by a prosecuters office .

[Broseph]

Obviously police officers have a tremendous amount of power over citizens.

They can arrest them, put them in jail, and basically destroy their lives, sometimes based on their "word".

What training and checks are there for this unjustly happening?

Thank you,

When it comes to questions like this, I would ask a neutral source, not a self-interested party.

Asking cops this question is like asking the Ford CEO whether American cars are better than European cars.

[signcut]

When it comes to questions like this, I would ask a neutral source, not a self-interested party.

Asking cops this question is like asking the Ford CEO whether American cars are better than European cars.

:rolleyes:

[terri910]

:rolleyes:
Should not possible bias at least be acknowledged?

I'm sorry, but to say (or imply by rolling eyes) that there is never bias seems a bit naive.

It would be equally naive to think that there are no cops without that bias.

[CMike11]

EVERYTHING is reviewed by a supervisor.

What does that mean exactly?

[neoINDIE]

What does that mean exactly?

Every report is approved by a supervisor.

[neoINDIE]

When it comes to questions like this, I would ask a neutral source, not a self-interested party.

Asking cops this question is like asking the Ford CEO whether American cars are better than European cars.

It is almost as good as people who have never been in law enforcement making snap judgements about things they have no clue about.

People who dislike cops, and would never do the job, but damn sure expect someone else to do it.

[terri910]

There are two types of people who will post in this thread, besides me.

One group will tear your arms off for even asking the question and the second group will beat you over the head with your bloody arms.

Just because I think it's interesting.....

[JenyEliza]

the event in Atlanta was the result of cops trying to cover up their **** up - which was exposed by who else? other cops.

Actually, that is not the case at all.

The dirty cops in Atlanta were turned in by the Confidential Informant they used in the warrant to trump up a case against Kathryn Johnston.

He was contacted by the dirty cops immediately after they killed the demonstrably innocent woman, and they tried to strong-arm the CI into going along with their story. The CI then called a local TV reporter who broke the case wide open. Once that happened, there was NO WAY they could cover their asses. The TRUTH was going to come out--like it or not.

It was only due to the CI turning on the dirty cops and the TV station broadcasting his story (which was initially not believed by anyone in the APD), as well as several high-pressure, highly emotional press conferences from the family and their lawyers that *forced* the Chief of Police's hand.

Had these things not taken place, they'd still be out raiding Great-Granny's house with bogus no-knock warrants. More importantly, they'd still be getting away with bloody murder (literally).

It would be nice if you had your facts straight.

aside from maybe traffic court - i am hard pressed to find any situation where a cops only evidence is what he says and that only based on what he says will that result in some legal punishment.

and if youre life is ruined by losing or being taken to traffic court - you need to get get a life.

I'm sure Mrs. Johnston would agree she needs to "get a life"

Unfortunately, a group of dirty cops decided they were her judge and jury.

They summarily executed the 98 year old innocent woman in her home, cuffed her to her chair while she bled out and simultaneously planted marijuana in her basement to make it look like a real bust.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Mrs. Johnston just needs to "get a life".

:rolleyes:

[CMike11]

I wasn't judging anything or anybody, I was just asking about procedures.

[JenyEliza]

So do you hate ALL cops?

I don't. I never said that. Please post a link to such comments made by me.

Oh, that's right. You can't because you're putting words in my mouth.

I guess that's to be expected from someone who defends dirty cops. Que cera cera.

And you wonder why people mistrust police? :wall: :rolleyes:

[JenyEliza]

Yeah, we are out there to kill people, not protect them. :rolleyes:

Personally 21weeks of intensive classroom training followed by 15 weeks of having an experienced officer riding with you.

Thank you for answering the question at hand.

So in less time than it takes to create a human life (ie, 40 weeks full term pregnancy), a cop can be trained in the classroom and then he/she's put on the streets armed to the teeth, with license (and discretion) to shoot to kill?

In the blink of an eye that 36 weeks of training can be used to snuff out the life it took 40 weeks to create.

Maybe it's just me, but somehow I feel like that is just not an adequate safeguard for the general public.

[mgifford]

what training do they get to ruin your life? none

what "check" is there against your life getting ruined over the "word" of an officer- its called a Trial.

i am trying hard to think of some way your life can be ruined on just the word of an officer though....

We humans are always accountable for our doings, but many times want to blame the bad things on someone else.

God: "Adam I was searching for you in the garden". Adam: God, I did nothing wrong, the "WOMAN" "THOU" gavest me did beguile me and I did eat the fruit".

It's been the same way with us humans since Adam.

[signcut]

Should not possible bias at least be acknowledged?

I'm sorry, but to say (or imply by rolling eyes) that there is never bias seems a bit naive.

It would be equally naive to think that there are no cops without that bias.

Then it falls to reason that nobody could ever actually talk freely about their job, as their biases would interfere, which is, of course, ridiculous on it's face.

The clear implication is that police and law enforcement cannot be trusted to speak without bias.

Yes, that does indeed merit an eyeroll...

[jimjames418]

If the Law requires a certain amount of time to be served for certain crimes, should cops serve more than others who get convicted?
There are specific laws written to deal with law enforcement personnel who break the law. This is called breaking the law under the color of law. And it calls for much harsher sentences than an ordinary citizen would receive.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights/statutes.htm)
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be ...

[terri910]

Then it falls to reason that nobody could ever actually talk freely about their job, as their biases would interfere, which is, of course, ridiculous on it's face.

The clear implication is that police and law enforcement cannot be trusted to speak without bias.

Yes, that does indeed merit an eyeroll...
So the eye roll wasn't denoting that bias does not exist....but that possible bias should not exclude anyone from speaking about their job. Gotcha. Makes more sense.

[jimjames418]

Just wondering what her thoughts were. My Department sent two of ours off for a long time. And I have no problem with most sentences, but for putting an extra charge on a man because of what he was thinking, when he did the crime. That I have a real problem with.
The "color of law" enhancements to a sentence is not for what the person was thinking, but is for the job they were being paid to do.

What you are thinking of is "hate laws", which I hate and believe are unconstitutional.

[neoINDIE]

Thank you for answering the question at hand.

So in less time than it takes to create a human life (ie, 40 weeks full term pregnancy), a cop can be trained in the classroom and then he/she's put on the streets armed to the teeth, with license (and discretion) to shoot to kill?

In the blink of an eye that 36 weeks of training can be used to snuff out the life it took 40 weeks to create.

Maybe it's just me, but somehow I feel like that is just not an adequate safeguard for the general public.

It seems you didn't read my post. 15 weeks on the street with a training officer is not classroom. It seems like an eternity when you are going through it.

And you wonder why I asked if you hate all cops? How many times have you made reference to cops "snuffing out life?" or something to that effect? Not once have I seen you refer to cops saving lives.

Lets see:

6-9 weeks training -- and then turned loose on the general public, with the power to absolutely DESTROY a persons's life, or worse yet kill them?

..

In the blink of an eye that 36 weeks of training can be used to snuff out the life it took 40 weeks to create.


Do you think that is enough training for cops to go into situations where they put their lives on the line to protect the public (...YOU...)?

What is enough time, in your opinion? By the way, I also have a degree in engineering and 35 years of life experience before becoming a cop. Is that enough?

And as far as defending dirty cops, never once have I done that. And I'm putting words in your mouth?

[neoINDIE]

Should not possible bias at least be acknowledged?

I'm sorry, but to say (or imply by rolling eyes) that there is never bias seems a bit naive.

It would be equally naive to think that there are no cops without that bias.

Of course there is bias. Everyone has bias.

However, if you want to know about LE procedures, how much sense does it make to ignore what LE has to say about it? Wouldn't they be the only ones who can really answer that question?

[Fire Watch]

Thank you for answering the question at hand.

So in less time than it takes to create a human life (ie, 40 weeks full term pregnancy), a cop can be trained in the classroom and then he/she's put on the streets armed to the teeth, with license (and discretion) to shoot to kill?

In the blink of an eye that 36 weeks of training can be used to snuff out the life it took 40 weeks to create.

Maybe it's just me, but somehow I feel like that is just not an adequate safeguard for the general public.
Let's ignore the months of interviews, vetting, background investigations, lie detectors, psych tests, and various other examinations that factor into being hired onto a PD before one ever reaches an academy. When I say months, I mean months.

[jimjames418]

Let's ignore the months of interviews, vetting, background investigations, lie detectors, psych tests, and various other examinations that factor into being hired onto a PD before one ever reaches an academy. When I say months, I mean months.
Unless you are in Chicago and your dad, brother, uncle, or cousin is on the force. Then you are hired the day you apply regardless of your qualifications or background. :doh:

[sgtmac_46]

There are two types of people who will post in this thread, besides me.

One group will tear your arms off for even asking the question and the second group will beat you over the head with your bloody arms.

Most LEO's must attend and pass an academy class on law enforcement, which teaches them how to perform their duties as police officers without going overboard. The class usually runs six to nine weeks.

However some departments do not require this training.

6 to 9 weeks? :)) What state are you in? :))

Try 9 months to a year. ;)

[sgtmac_46]

The law is the tool that the LEO uses to wield the power that even the President doesn't have, that to deprive someone of their liberty, but it is also the restraint that can be against them.

Oh dear gawd! :rolleyes:

We are the lowest rung of the EXECUTIVE Branch.....period.

[sgtmac_46]

http://forums.hannity.com/showpost.php?p=54891281&postcount=9 I'm sorry.......where is your example of someone's life being ruined based solely on the word of an officer....

[sgtmac_46]

Should cops have to attend a military style boot camp like military members do? I think it would do a great job of weeding out the weak minded and those who are only trying to become a LEO because of an inferiority complex from earlier in life. But the problem with that argument is that 90 percent of cops are good integrity filled people.
It is the other ten percent that give cops a bad name. Not to mention making cops go through a military style bootcamp would be overkill.
I know in the state I live in to basically become a local cop or sheriff one just needs to attend the 6 week course at the local community college.
So 10% percent of cops are bad apples, huh? Which orifice did you pull that factoid out of?

Did I miss the start of 'Pile it on the cops' week?

[sgtmac_46]

When it comes to questions like this, I would ask a neutral source, not a self-interested party.

Asking cops this question is like asking the Ford CEO whether American cars are better than European cars. We should ask you......you know everything, apparently. Just pull out one of your patented 'Bad Cop' story anecdotes and it'll explain everything. ;)

'Neutral sources' 'Interested Parties'........ONLY in police work do we have CLOWNS who believe that they are more expert on the subject matter than those DOING IT! If we were talking about doctors or lawyers the kind of Monday morning expertise we see demonstrated in some of these threads would get someone LAUGHED off the boards! :wall:



So who are you going to ask about these things, genius? What 'unbiased' source are you going to ask about police training? Oh, uh, uh, uh, ......I know......how about a DEFENSE attorney! ;)

[sgtmac_46]

Should not possible bias at least be acknowledged?

I'm sorry, but to say (or imply by rolling eyes) that there is never bias seems a bit naive.

It would be equally naive to think that there are no cops without that bias.
Are you biased?

[jimjames418]

6 to 9 weeks? :)) What state are you in? :))

Try 9 months to a year. ;)
There is no set requirement that local, city, county, and township law enforcement officers must meet. Most do have a requirement that the applicant have some training.

I live in Michigan, and the Michigan State Police (http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/Catalog_258792_7.pdf)have a very fine and good training facility, which is available to any member of the public that wishes to attend an area of interest. Heck we even have out of state LEO's that attend some of the more advanced training. However, it is only mandatory that State Police LEO's attend the complete training program, which is 16 months. The last class was cancelled due to budget cuts, and I believe that the 175 members of that class are now working for the cities and counties.

[sgtmac_46]

What does that mean exactly?
That means that every bit of paper work from the officer is reviewed by and passes through MULTIPLE points of review, from the supervisor to the prosecuting attorney's office.

What, do you think I cop says something and you go to prison? Come on people!

[sgtmac_46]

There is no set requirement that local, city, county, and township law enforcement officers must meet. Most do have a requirement that the applicant have some training.

I live in Michigan, and the Michigan State Police (http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/Catalog_258792_7.pdf)have a very fine and good training facility, which is available to any member of the public that wishes to attend an area of interest. Heck we even have out of state LEO's that attend some of the more advanced training. However, it is only mandatory that State Police LEO's attend the complete training program, which is 16 months. The last class was cancelled due to budget cuts, and I believe that the 175 members of that class are now working for the cities and counties.

You are....surprisingly <ahem>.......mistaken.

The following information outlines the process by which a candidate may become licensed as a law enforcement officer in the state of Michigan .



Licensing as a law enforcement officer in Michigan must be approved through the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards (MCOLES). This happens when the following two requirements are met by the candidate: (1) compliance with MCOLES minimum selection standards which includes satisfactory completion of a basic police academy or recognition of prior training and experience, and (2) employment with a law enforcement agency as a law enforcement officer. Previously licensed police officers in Michigan, or from another state, who are seeking re-licensure are directed to the MCOLES Recognition of Prior Training and Experience program.



The MCOLES minimum selection requirements are outlined in a document entitled Employment Standards for Michigan Law Enforcement Officers. As you formulate your plans to become a licensed police officer, please note that candidates are required to take two pre-enrollment tests, unless you have been previously licensed here or in another state. The tests consist of a reading and writing examination and a physical fitness performance examination. The tests are administered periodically at selected sites throughout the state. Typically, the starting point for most is to take the reading and writing examination because it never expires. The physical fitness exam is valid for 180 days prior to entering an academy. To schedule a test, contact the testing site directly. Previously licensed officers are not required to take these tests.


Basic recruit training, which is the major component of the pre-employment standards, must be completed at an approved training academy. Regional training academies are located throughout the state. All training academies are required to teach, as a minimum, the state's basic training curriculum, which is 562 hours in length. At the completion of the academy, all graduates are required to pass a licensing examination administered by the state. http://www.michigan.gov/mcoles/0,1607,7-229-41624-150154--,00.html

[sgtmac_46]

I don't. I never said that. Please post a link to such comments made by me.

Oh, that's right. You can't because you're putting words in my mouth.

I guess that's to be expected from someone who defends dirty cops. Que cera cera.

And you wonder why people mistrust police? :wall: :rolleyes:

I don't trust teachers because of all those teachers sleeping with their students.........even though only 10 percent of teachers are probably dirty.......bad apples ruining it for everyone.

[sgtmac_46]

Thank you for answering the question at hand.

So in less time than it takes to create a human life (ie, 40 weeks full term pregnancy), a cop can be trained in the classroom and then he/she's put on the streets armed to the teeth, with license (and discretion) to shoot to kill?

In the blink of an eye that 36 weeks of training can be used to snuff out the life it took 40 weeks to create.

Maybe it's just me, but somehow I feel like that is just not an adequate safeguard for the general public.

Somehow I suspect that no answer would be right for you......or, more specifically, any 'reasonable' amount of time you as a citizen wouldn't want to pay for. ;)

6 months or 9 months not enough? How about a year? two years? four years? You willing to pay for four years of training per officer to have police protection? Just curious, because you're getting EXACTLY what you're paying for.

[jimjames418]

I don't trust teachers because of all those teachers sleeping with their students.........even though only 10 percent of teachers are probably dirty.......bad apples ruining it for everyone.
Question for you sgt. Do you believe that any law enforcement officers are bad? A simple yes or no will do. Thanks,

[JenyEliza]

Somehow I suspect that no answer would be right for you......or, more specifically, any 'reasonable' amount of time you as a citizen wouldn't want to pay for. ;)

What do you think is the "reasonable" amount of training?

I do find it ironic that it takes longer to create a human life (40 weeks) than the training one poster said officers receive before they're given license to take a human life (approximately 36 weeks).

Don't you find that odd? I do.

[sgtmac_46]

Question for you sgt. Do you believe that any law enforcement officers are bad? A simple yes or no will do. Thanks, Do you believe that law enforcement officers are, in general, MORE bad or LESS bad than the general population.....you answer my question and i'll answer yours..........quid pro quo.

More specifically do you believe that there are......more, less or about the same bad police officers as there are bad doctors, nurses, teachers?

[sgtmac_46]

What do you think is the "reasonable" amount of training?

I do find it ironic that it takes longer to create a human life (40 weeks) than the training one poster said officers receive before they're given license to take a human life (approximately 36 weeks).

Don't you find that odd? I do.

I asked you first.......then tell me what you're willing to pay for.......because it's coming out of YOUR pocket. ;)

[JenyEliza]

I echo jim's question.

Do any LEO's in this thread admit there are bad officers? Or do you think they're just a figment of the imagination of us mere mortal citizens?

A yes or no is plenty of an answer.

[jimjames418]

Do you believe that law enforcement officers are, in general, MORE bad or LESS bad than the general population.....you answer my question and i'll answer yours..........quid pro quo.

More specifically do you believe that there are......more, less or about the same bad police officers as there are bad doctors, nurses, teachers?
I think that in any group of people, there are sure to be some bad apples. Not many, but enough to ruin the image of the entire group.

It is not whether a group has bad apples, it is what the group, as a whole does with its bad apples that determines the view of many people. And lately it seems that no one wants to take responsibility and clean up their own ranks, IMHO.

[sgtmac_46]

I echo jim's question.

Do any LEO's in this thread admit there are bad officers? Or do you think they're just a figment of the imagination of us mere mortal citizens?

A yes or no is plenty of an answer. I'll answer ANY question you ask me if you'll answer mine in kind.

[sgtmac_46]

I think that in any group of people, there are sure to be some bad apples. Not many, but enough to ruin the image of the entire group.

It is not whether a group has bad apples, it is what the group, as a whole does with its bad apples that determines the view of many people. And lately it seems that no one wants to take responsibility and clean up their own ranks, IMHO.

So if i'm not a bad apple.....I am by your image of me regardless of the reality.....nice.

Answer my question as it was asked.......ARE there more bad apples, as a representative of the group, among police officers than among doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers?

[JenyEliza]

I think that in any group of people, there are sure to be some bad apples. Not many, but enough to ruin the image of the entire group.

It is not whether a group has bad apples, it is what the group, as a whole does with its bad apples that determines the view of many people. And lately it seems that no one wants to take responsibility and clean up their own ranks, IMHO.

You've summed up my thoughts as well.

[sgtmac_46]

You've summed up my thoughts as well.

It didn't really sum anything up......care to answer my question?

As a token to show that i'm not dodging yours.....OF course there are bad police officers. Peterson is a prime example of that.

NOW can you answer mine? Are there more bad police officers, as a representative of the group, than doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers?

Quid pro quo....

[JenyEliza]

I'll answer ANY question you ask me if you'll answer mine in kind.

I have. Please see jimjames' assessment. He spelled it out much better than I could.

Thank you. Looking forward to your answer(s). :D

[sgtmac_46]

I have. Please see jimjames' assessment. He spelled it out much better than I could.

Thank you. Looking forward to your answer(s). :D No he didn't, he DODGED the question, just as you are......is 'dodging' your assessment?

[jimjames418]

So if i'm not a bad apple.....I am by your image of me regardless of the reality.....nice.

Answer my question as it was asked.......ARE there more bad apples, as a representative of the group, among police officers than among doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers?
Ranked in order of % of the group I would say:

lawyers
teachers
doctors
police officers
nurses

Now you answer the question, do you think there are ever any bad police officers. Or do you want to continue playing the "cop" game with us.

[sgtmac_46]

Ranked in order of % of the group I would say:

lawyers
teachers
doctors
police officers
nurses

Now you answer the question, do you think there are ever any bad police officers. Or do you want to continue playing the "cop" game with us.

I already answered your question.......if you actually read what I said instead of what you think i'm saying you'd know that. ;)

'Cop' game, huh? You've got a pretty big chip on your shoulder don't you?

[jimjames418]

No he didn't, he DODGED the question, just as you are......is 'dodging' your assessment?
Again the cop game, answer a question with a question. You think we will ever catch on to the game?

[JenyEliza]

There are bad apples in EVERY profession. Law Enforcement is no exception.

Unfortunately, even ONE bad apple can spoil the reputation of a whole profession.

See: Laywers, doctors, politicians, judges, government employees....and yes, police officers.

Do you understand now? :wall:

You seem to believe that ALL LEO's are perfect and above reproach. That is simply untrue and an untenable position to defend. But you're welcome to hold that opinion. You're entitled to be wrong.

[jimjames418]

I already answered your question.......if you actually read what I said instead of what you think i'm saying you'd know that. ;)

'Cop' game, huh? You've got a pretty big chip on your shoulder don't you?
No, but you sure as hell do. Can't or won't even answer a simple yes or no question. And you wonder why no one trusts police officers?

[JenyEliza]

I have to step away from the computer for a while, but I'll be back to answer any other "questions" you have. :D

[sgtmac_46]

There are bad apples in EVERY profession. Law Enforcement is no exception.

Unfortunately, even ONE bad apple can spoil the reputation of a whole profession.

See: Laywers, doctors, politicians, judges, government employees....and yes, police officers.

Do you understand now? :wall:

You seem to believe that ALL LEO's are perfect and above reproach. That is simply untrue and an untenable position to defend. But you're welcome to hold that opinion. You're entitled to be wrong.

When you all get up to reading the post where I answered the question you are attempting to brow beat me about, let me know. :)

[JenyEliza]

I looked all over this thread for your "yes or no" answer.

Didn't find it.

I'll check back later. Maybe by then you will answer.

A girl can hope. *shrug*

[sgtmac_46]

I looked all over this thread for your "yes or no" answer.

Didn't find it.

I'll check back later. Maybe by then you will answer.

A girl can hope. *shrug*


A girl needs to work on her reading comprehension. ;)

It didn't really sum anything up......care to answer my question?

As a token to show that i'm not dodging yours.....OF course there are bad police officers.
Peterson is a prime example of that.

NOW can you answer mine? Are there more bad police officers, as a representative of the group, than doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers?

Quid pro quo.... Doesn't get any clearer than that...

Now go back and count how many smarmy comments you and jim made AFTER that post about me NOT answering the question that I clearly already answered. ;)

[sgtmac_46]

And where is this 'accountability' crap i'm hearing about? I do my job and I do it well.......and I do it honorably. Why do I have to apologize and lay prostrate at YOUR feet declaring that there may indeed be police bad apples somewhere to appease some bizarre and misplaced vindictive sense of retribution? If you have evidence I HAVE committed some violation of my oath, lets hear it! Otherwise, i'm not responsible for every real and imagined 'bad cop' anecdote some folks can dream up.

If you have issues with a SPECIFIC case of police excess, lets discuss that.......the generic 'All cops are bad' or '10% of all cops are bad' is pure hyperbole.......make your case on individual incidents.......if you can......where some of your anger comes from, however, is the failure of some of US to walk in lock-step agreement with your conclusions about what IS and IS NOT a 'bad cop'.......many times you folks are just plain WRONG!

[JenyEliza]

A girl needs to work on her reading comprehension. ;)

Are there more bad police officers, as a representative of the group, than doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers?


Now go back and count how many smarmy comments you and jim made about me NOT answering the question that I clearly answered. ;)

I don't know what the proportion of *bad cops* there are as compared to doctors, lawyer, nurses and teachers.

I do know that dishonest, crooked cops do have the power and are capable of destroying many lives--based on their word-and the word of their fellow cops who (almost always) back them up whether they're telling the truth or not.

I don't know of any other occupation, other than Doctors or the Pope himself, where someone's word is treated as infallable and capable of inflicting SO much damage to the lives of innocents.

Do you remember the Duke Lacrosse farce? Again....dirty cops, dirty DA, dirty Mayor, and a lying sack of **** so-called "victim" nearly destroyed the lives of demonstrably INNOCENT young men.

Come on--it's no slam on you personally if you admit that there are bad bad apples in your profession.

However, I do find it quite telling that so many LEO's in this thread (and other threads) simply refuse to acknowlege the power they have to destroy innocent lives, or that there are LEO's all across this country who have and continue to act in bad faith with complete impunity.

I'm not now and have never said YOU PERSONALLY are bad or dirty.

Why are you so defensive? Do you take part in the unwritten "protect my brothers at all costs, thin blue line" code?

[sgtmac_46]

I don't know what the proportion of *bad cops* there are as compared to doctors, lawyer, nurses and teachers. Yet we don't hear you making blanket 'teachers' or 'doctors' statements, do we? There are FAR more people killed by bad doctors than by bad cops by ANY conservative estimate.

I do know that dishonest, crooked cops do have ther power to and are capable of destroying many lives--based on their word-and the word of their fellow cops who (almost always) back them up whether they're telling the truth or not. Or so you say........stop watching that DVD of 'Training Day'.

I don't know of any other occupation, other than Doctors or the Pope himself, where someone's word is treated as infallable and capable of inflicting SO much damage to the lives of innocents. Or lawyers or politicians.......yet, irony of ironies, when it comes to a WHIPPING BOY........there is NEVER one so convenient as the Poh-lice.

Do you remember the Duke Lacrosse farce? Again....dirty cops, dirty DA, dirty Mayor, and a lying sack of **** so-called "victim" nearly destroyed the lives of demonstrably INNOCENT young men. Dirty cops? You DO mean DIRTY PROSECUTOR, right? The police send a REPORT to the prosecutor based on what they are told. There is NO allegation that the police lied to the Prosecutor.......the alleged VICTIM lied, but the police reported the results of their investigation. The PROSECUTOR chose to pursue the issue in the manner he did.....PERIOD!

Come on--it's no slam on you personally if you admit that there are bad bad apples in your profession. You very much intend it as a slam to me......otherwise why do you turn a debate about a SPECIFIC incident......Cop (singular) in to an attack on COP(S) (Plural)?

However, I do find it quite telling that so many LEO's in this thread (and other threads) simply refuse to acknowlege the power they have to destroy innocent lives, or that there are LEO's all across this country who have and continue to act in bad faith with complete impunity. Your problem is that when the facts of a specific incident don't support your preconceived biases your resort to hyperbole about an entire group!

I'm not now and have never said YOU PERSONALLY are bad or dirty.

Why are you so defensive? Do you take part in the unwritten "protect my brothers at all costs, thin blue line" code? And why do you have such a desire to paint with a broad brush when a discussion of specific incidents would suffice?

[JenyEliza]

And where is this 'accountability' crap i'm hearing about? I do my job and I do it well.......and I do it honorably.

I'm sure you do, and I never said otherwise. I don't think anyone else here has either.

Why do I have to apologize and lay prostrate at YOUR feet declaring that there may indeed be police bad apples somewhere to appease some bizarre and misplaced vindictive sense of retribution?

You don't. Nobody asked you to.

Again, I have to ask--why are you so defensive?

If you have evidence I HAVE committed some violation of my oath, lets hear it! Otherwise, i'm not responsible for every real and imagined 'bad cop' anecdote some folks can dream up.

Nobody has said you've commited any violation. You're taking this thread WAY TOO PERSONALLY. It's not about you.

And as for "dreaming up" things, several posters have presented numerous real-life cases of officers acting in totally bad faith, mistreating innocent people, and destroying lives and the good names of people who didn't deserve it.

These instances are NOT fabrications. Yet you refuse to acknowlege this.


If you have issues with a SPECIFIC case of police excess, lets discuss that.......

We've posted case after case. You choose to ignore these cases and, instead, take this thread as a personal insult. That is YOUR problem, not ours.

the generic 'All cops are bad' or '10% of all cops are bad' is pure hyperbole.......make your case on individual incidents.......if you can......where some of your anger comes from, however, is the failure of some of US to walk in lock-step agreement with your conclusions about what IS and IS NOT a 'bad cop'.......many times you folks are just plain WRONG!

Yeah, whatever. :rolleyes:

[RickRhetoric]

If your a Man, you're screwed.

... and if you're a white man, you're really screwed! LEO's are afraid of minorities, but not white men.

[JenyEliza]

Yet we don't hear you making blanket 'teachers' or 'doctors' statements, do we? There are FAR more people killed by bad doctors than by bad cops by ANY conservative estimate.

Or so you say........stop watching that DVD of 'Training Day'.

Or lawyers or politicians.......yet, irony of ironies, when it comes to a WHIPPING BOY........there is NEVER one so convenient as the Poh-lice.

Dirty cops? You DO mean DIRTY PROSECUTOR, right? The police send a REPORT to the prosecutor based on what they are told. There is NO allegation that the police lied to the Prosecutor.......the alleged VICTIM lied, but the police reported the results of their investigation. The PROSECUTOR chose to pursue the issue in the manner he did.....PERIOD!

You very much intend it as a slam to me......otherwise why do you turn a debate about a SPECIFIC incident......Cop (singular) in to an attack on COP(S) (Plural)?

Your problem is that when the facts of a specific incident don't support your preconceived biases your resort to hyperbole about an entire group!

And why do you have such a desire to paint with a broad brush when a discussion of specific incidents would suffice?

:)) :)) :))

I'm sorry. I just find it very difficult to take you seriously in this thread, considering you're taking it as a "personal call out", and an attack on your personal integrity.

p.s. In the Duke case the DA was dirty and took the fall for the dirty cops, the dirty mayor and other actors of bad faith. Do a little up-to-date research on their case, and you will see there a LOT of dirty folks involved, not just the DA.

[CMike11]

That means that every bit of paper work from the officer is reviewed by and passes through MULTIPLE points of review, from the supervisor to the prosecuting attorney's office.

What, do you think I cop says something and you go to prison? Come on people!

I think it's possible.

Let's say the cop really hates a particular person for whatever reason.

Let' say a cop says I saw this person doing (blank, something really bad). He also resisted arrest and struck me in the stomach.

What would happen to that person?

I am asking for honest answers.

[JenyEliza]

... and if you're a white man, you're really screwed! LEO's are afraid of minorities, but not white men.

This is the result of the Rodney King case, where there *absolutely* were dirty cops involved.

Or maybe that's a figment of my imagination too? :think: :wall:

[sgtmac_46]

I'm sure you do, and I never said otherwise. I don't think anyone else here has either. Ahuh.....



You don't. Nobody asked you to. Sure you did.....this entire thread is a call-out.

Again, I have to ask--why are you so defensive? Why do you feel the need to make the subject ANYTHING but the individuals you feel have done something wrong? Why is this about the profession? You can answer your own question.



Nobody has said you've commited any violation. You're taking this thread WAY TOO PERSONALLY. It's not about you. What is the thread about, in your opinion?

And as for "dreaming up" things, several posters have presented numerous real-life cases of officers acting in totally bad faith, mistreating innocent people, and destroying lives and the good names of people who didn't deserve it. Several posters have presented numerous anecdotes, taken from THEIR own biased perspective, given their take on what they think was an officer behaving badly........surely you know that is NOT the same thing, right?

These instances are NOT fabrications. Yet you refuse to acknowlege this. How do you know they aren't fabrications? Faith? It reinforces your own biases? In my line of work second hand anecdotes are NOT evidence.

We've posted case after case. You choose to ignore these cases and, instead, take this thread as a personal insult. That is YOUR problem, not ours. Case after case of what? You point me toward a specific case and i'll make a specific pronouncement.......but what YOU really want is an indictment of an entire PROFESSION!



Yeah, whatever. :rolleyes: Pretty much what I think when I see these 'Cops are bad' threads.

[CMike11]

So if i'm not a bad apple.....I am by your image of me regardless of the reality.....nice.

Answer my question as it was asked.......ARE there more bad apples, as a representative of the group, among police officers than among doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers?

Not that you asked me. My answer would be I don't know.

There may be more people drawn to the potential of power in this profession than others. There is certainly a tremendous potential for abuse. Wouldn't you agree?

[sgtmac_46]

I think it's possible.

Let's say the cop really hates a particular person for whatever reason.

Let' say a cop says I saw this person doing (blank, something really bad). He also resisted arrest and struck me in the stomach.

What would happen to that person?

I am asking for honest answers. Have you ever been to court? Have you ever sat on a witness stand for four hours giving testimony?

[sgtmac_46]

:)) :)) :))

I'm sorry. I just find it very difficult to take you seriously in this thread, considering you're taking it as a "personal call out", and an attack on your personal integrity.

p.s. In the Duke case the DA was dirty and took the fall for the dirty cops, the dirty mayor and other actors of bad faith. Do a little up-to-date research on their case, and you will see there a LOT of dirty folks involved, not just the DA.

Dirty mayor? Since when did mayors prosecute people? How can YOU be taken seriously when you don't even have the most basic understanding of the mechanics of the system?

[CMike11]

Ahuh.....



Sure you did.....this entire thread is a call-out.

Why do you feel the need to make the subject ANYTHING but the individuals you feel have done something wrong? Why is this about the profession? You can answer your own question.



What is the thread about, in your opinion?

Several posters have presented numerous anecdotes, taken from THEIR own biased perspective, given their take on what they think was an officer behaving badly........surely you know that is NOT the same thing, right?

How do you know they aren't fabrications? Faith? It reinforces your own biases? In my line of work second hand anecdotes are NOT evidence.

Case after case of what? You point me toward a specific case and i'll make a specific pronouncement.......but what YOU really want is an indictment of an entire PROFESSION!



Pretty much what I think when I see these 'Cops are bad' threads.


Mac you are going meshegene.

I started this thread so I will tell you my intention.

I created it mainly as a result of the officer killed in the accident thread.

I stated the intention of the pretty pretty clearly in my OP I think.

There is a tremendous amount of power a police officer potentially wields. A police officer if he wanted to can more or less create great unpleasantness for someone he doesn't like.

My question is what measures were in place to keep abuses from happening.

The reason I asked the question was to find out the answer.

Seriously man, chill out.

Could you please just answer the question.

[signcut]

Oh dear gawd! :rolleyes:

We are the lowest rung of the EXECUTIVE Branch.....period.

True, but with the power to legally deprive someone of their liberty. Lowest rung, highest... it is still a tremendous power in our country.

[JenyEliza]

Here is an example of police misbehavior.
Picture: http://media.lvrj.com/images/3546673.jpg (warning, graphic)

http://www.lvrj.com/news/45619762.html

Speeding at 109 mph in a 45 mph zone, no lights, no siren. Stealth mode.

Cop rear-ends an innocent driver who gets in his way. Cop dies.

Innocent driver is arrested and charged with DUI and failing to yield to an emergency vehicle (which he could not have known was approaching at such a high rate of speed without lights and siren).

A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

Even the dead officer's boss agrees his officer misbehaved on the job:


Gillespie called Manor's speed in the 45-mph zone on Flamingo Road "excessive and unsafe," even if his lights and siren had been on. The facts of the accident probably will alter the charges Darling faces, the sheriff said.

"The facts that we have I think certainly change the charges that are there," a stern Gillespie said in an afternoon news conference. "We do believe his speed was a significant factor in what took place in this accident. So yes, we are looking at those original charges."

Mr. Darling's life has already been up-ended by his encounter with Officer Manor. It's a miracle he's still alive after the officer hit him going 109 mph in a 45 mph zone. Unfortunately, he's already been arrested, his name and face plastered all over the news and his life has been changed forever.

Nothing anyone does at this point will restore him to his former life, or give him his good name back.

Then there's the "thin blue line" that tried to cover for the dead officer:


Gillespie said that when he addressed the media many hours after the accident, he had been given incorrect information by first responders to the crash. They said Manor and the second officer had their lights and sirens on.

"They were there right after it, and they thought that that's what they were told," the sheriff said. "And we didn't interview the secondary officer right away because it was a very traumatic event."

The department will review and change how it collects and releases information after fatal accidents involving officers, Gillespie said. He said the department wasn't considering disciplinary action against those officers who relayed the information.

This is *single* example of WHY the general public has a growing mistrust of LEO's.

Please explain why we shouldn't mistrust people who abuse and mistreat the mere mortals that are our friends, family, neighbors, etc?

[sgtmac_46]

True, but with the power to legally deprive someone of their liberty. Lowest rung, highest... it is still a tremendous power in our country.

It is tremendous........with tremendous oversight. We are the most scrutinized profession on the planet.....and everyone on the planet is a self-proclaimed expert on police practices.

Folks who think we just SHOOT people with impunity have watched 'The Shield' and 'Training Day' ONE TIME too many.

[sgtmac_46]

Mac you are going meshegene.

I started this thread so I will tell you my intention.

I created it mainly as a result of the officer killed in the accident thread.

I stated the intention of the pretty pretty clearly in my OP I think.

There is a tremendous amount of power a police officer potentially wields. A police officer if he wanted to can more or less create great unpleasantness for someone he doesn't like.

My question is what measures were in place to keep abuses from happening.

The reason I asked the question was to find out the answer.

Seriously man, chill out.

Could you please just answer the question. I've answered the question......contrary to what you see on TV, law enforcement is the most scrutinized profession on the planet. If I fail to signal a left turn it gets reported to the chief of police by some member of the public.

My chief can then pull the video from my dash cam which runs for my entire shift. My dash camera also records speed and location.

[sgtmac_46]

Here is an example of police misbehavior.
Picture: http://media.lvrj.com/images/3546673.jpg (warning, graphic)

http://www.lvrj.com/news/45619762.html

Speeding at 109 mph in a 45 mph zone, no lights, no siren. Stealth mode.

Cop rear-ends an innocent driver who gets in his way. Cop dies. He screwed up.......and he's dead. Non-cops do the same thing. Where is the massive break down of the system that you are insinuating?

Innocent driver is arrested and charged with DUI and failing to yield to an emergency vehicle (which he could not have known was approaching at such a high rate of speed without lights and siren). And the charges were dropped upon further investigation. The system worked......where is the massive break down?



Even the dead officer's boss agrees his officer misbehaved on the job: Where is this 'thin-blue line of evil' you have referred to, then?



Mr. Darling's life has already been up-ended by his encounter with Officer Manor. It's a miracle he's still alive after the officer hit him going 109 mph in a 45 mph zone. Unfortunately, he's already been arrested, his name and face plastered all over the news and his life has been changed forever. And those charges have been dropped.......where is the break down?

Nothing anyone does at this point will restore him to his former life, or give him his good name back. The charges were dropped after a complete investigation......what are you suggesting?

Then there's the "thin blue line" that tried to cover for the dead officer: You mean the officer that is dead and his Chief admitted he screwed up? :eh:

This is *single* example of WHY the general public has a growing mistrust of LEO's. Only an idiot would use a single example to mistrust anything.

Please explain why we shouldn't mistrust people who abuse and mistreat the mere mortals that are our friends, family, neighbors, etc? So now all cops are abusing your friends, family and neighbors.........now we're getting to the truth of your beliefs on the matter.......much as you protest you are doing otherwise, it still comes down to 'Cops are criminals'.


This officer didn't 'abuse' anyone........he DID use incredibly poor judgment....and he's dead. Would you like to dig him up and beat him like a pinata as a symbol of all those 'bad cops' lurking in your neighborhood?

[JenyEliza]

The falsified arrest warrant created by the LVMPD for Calvin Darling.

Read the narrative all the way through. The dept created many of the details out of whole cloth, and presented them as "fact".

http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

THIS is why more and more Americans distrust LEO's.

[JenyEliza]

Also note the time of the accident (01:50 hrs, 5/7/09), and the date/time the warrant was "approved" by B. Schmidt on 5/7/09 at 11:07 am on 5/7/09.

A whopping 9 hours between accident, investigation and approval. Is that standard?

Doesn't seem like that is terribly long to approve the arrest of a mere mortal person. I rather doubt the two blood draws were even back from the lab at that point.

These are FACTS....not something I whipped up. What say the LEO's here?

http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

[sgtmac_46]

The falsified arrest warrant created by the LVMPD for Calvin Darling.

Read the narrative all the way through. The dept created many of the details out of whole cloth, and presented them as "fact".

http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

THIS is why more and more Americans distrust LEO's.

Was he, in fact, operating a vehicle while in an intoxicated condition? If he was, where are these 'facts' you claim they were inventing?

[JenyEliza]

Was he, in fact, operating a vehicle while in an intoxicated condition? If he was, where are these 'facts' you claim they were inventing?

Not according to Nevada law, he wasn't.


A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

They didn't wait for the BAC to come back. They arrested him in the ER. Note the arrest warrant does NOT list his BAC at the time of arrest. Seems to me before he is charged with DUI death, they would have some FACTS to back them up.

http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

[sgtmac_46]

Not according to Nevada law, he wasn't.



They didn't wait for the BAC to come back. They arrested him in the ER. Note the arrest warrant does NOT list his BAC at the time of arrest. Seems to me before he is charged with DUI death, they would have some FACTS to back them up.

http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

A BAC is not required for Driving While Intoxicated........this is where your knowledge or lack there of is crucial. Most state laws do not read 'You are intoxicated above this point'.........DWI statutes are based on 'impairment' not a number......what you are confusing that with are 'Intoxicated per se' statutes that say if you are above a set number you are PRESUMED intoxicated.

Another issue you are confused about is the difference between 'Probable Cause' required for an arrest and 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' required for conviction.........Probable Cause was met, otherwise a JUDGE would not have issued a warrant......Beyond a Reasonable Doubt could not be made, thus the charges were dropped.


Knowledge of how the system works is PRE-REQUISITE to considering yourself an 'educated' critic of it. ;)

[JenyEliza]

Always handy with an excuse for the inexcuseable. Wow. Color me surprised. (not)

Oh, well. The good citizens of Las Vegas will be writing BIG checks to Mr. Darling and his family. It's a shame. This "accident" was absolutely preventable--all Officer Manor had to do was exercise a little good judgement and caution in the execution of his duties.

He didn't and he's dead and another man's life changed forever by their split second encounter--an encounter the officer's buddies tried to cover up and pin on an innocent man.

[sgtmac_46]

Also note the time of the accident (01:50 hrs, 5/7/09), and the date/time the warrant was "approved" by B. Schmidt on 5/7/09 at 11:07 am on 5/7/09. First of all, the fact that you 'think' that the 'warrant' was approved by 'B. Schmidt' really illustrates the lack of knowledge about what you are talking about.

B. Schmidt, in the context of this report, is the SUPERVISOR reviewing the REPORT and approving the report......he didn't approve 'the Warrant'.......WARRANTS are issued by JUDGES!

A whopping 9 hours between accident, investigation and approval. Is that standard? An initial report should be filled within that time frame. It doesn't mark the END of the investigation, merely the BEGINNING of the paper trail.

Doesn't seem like that is terribly long to approve the arrest of a mere mortal person. I rather doubt the two blood draws were even back from the lab at that point. Well, since he was APPROVING the report, not the arrest, your point is moot. ;)



http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

[JenyEliza]

PS. As a US citizen, I am absolutely FREE to criticize ALL branches of government. Including LEO's.

I don't have to be an officer to be qualified to criticize the way Officer Manor handled himself the night he caused his own death.

[CMike11]

I think most people who have just been hit at 109 mph would be impaired for that reason alone.

In any case that is an issue for the other thread, not this one.

[sgtmac_46]

Always handy with an excuse for the inexcuseable. Wow. Color me surprised. (not)

Oh, well. The good citizens of Las Vegas will be writing BIG checks to Mr. Darling and his family. It's a shame. This "accident" was absolutely preventable--all Officer Manor had to do was exercise a little good judgement and caution in the execution of his duties.

He didn't and he's dead and another man's life changed forever by their split second encounter--an encounter the officer's buddies tried to cover up and pin on an innocent man.

Oh, i'm sorry, genius, what was I 'excusing' again? You asked for an 'explanation'.......but apparently you don't want the ANSWER, you want someone to tell you what you want to hear.......tell you what, you want anymore answers, ask Jim.......he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, but at least you'll like HIS answers better than the truth. ;)



Oh, by the way, which of his 'buddies' tried to cover it up? Lets hear some names! (Bet she just cuts and pastes the names from the report without any PROOF that the officers filling the report were reporting anything but the facts as they believed them to be true at the time.....)

Bottom line is that you don't know JACK about this incident but what little bit you read.......and you've SHOWN you can't even accurately interpret THAT!

[sgtmac_46]

I think most people who have just been hit at 109 mph would be impaired for that reason alone.

In any case that is an issue for the other thread, not this one.

He's dead.......next question.

[jimjames418]

.......tell you what, you want anymore answers, ask Jim.......he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, but at least you'll like HIS answers better than the truth. ;)
Sgt, I like you and your posts most of the time. It is at times like this where you are showing what the "thin blue line" does where we part company.

BTW, no judge issued an arrest warrant for Daling's arrest. The arrest was made by the officer at the hospital while Mr. Darling was laying in a hospital bed. Just couldn't wait until a judge was gotten out of bed and reviewed the "facts". And the "facts" as it turned out happened to be made up by other officers trying to cover for one of their own.

You can't make this stuff up and would not be believed if it was put into a tv show or movie. IMHO as always.

[CaptPops]

BTW, no judge issued an arrest warrant for Daling's arrest. The arrest was made by the officer at the hospital while Mr. Darling was laying in a hospital bed. Just couldn't wait until a judge was gotten out of bed and reviewed the "facts". .

The cop made a bad mistake, arresting him in the hospital, Now the city is on the hook for his hospital bills.

[JenyEliza]

He screwed up.......and he's dead. Non-cops do the same thing. Where is the massive break down of the system that you are insinuating?

Screwed up? 109 mph is not "he screwed up". That's massively STUPID. Even with the lights and siren on. He endanged his life and the life of EVERY person he passed or encountered in the process. STUPIDITY. So says the guy's boss.

The breakdown in the system is that the 2nd responders were taken at their word, they did not wait for the BAC to come back before they charged the man with DUI occasioning death, as well as failure to yield to emergency vehicles (in stealth mode). The 2nd responders LIED when they said lights and siren were going. They were not. They knew this at the time--they were racing each other to the domestic dispute call. The officers in the 2nd car falsified the arrest report/warrant, to cover up their inappropriate behavior (ie, speeding at high rates through residential areas--no lights, no siren against accepted police procedures).

They arrested Mr. Darling while he lay in the hospital bed. He was not DUI. He DID NOT fail to yield.

The charges have NOT yet been dropped--the Chief simply said they are "looking at the original charges". If you have proof to the contrary, please post it.

You probably ought to do a little research on this incident and get your facts straight before you make yourself look foolish.

[JenyEliza]

Oh, i'm sorry, genius, what was I 'excusing' again? You asked for an 'explanation'.......but apparently you don't want the ANSWER, you want someone to tell you what you want to hear.......tell you what, you want anymore answers, ask Jim.......he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, but at least you'll like HIS answers better than the truth. ;)



Oh, by the way, which of his 'buddies' tried to cover it up? Lets hear some names! (Bet she just cuts and pastes the names from the report without any PROOF that the officers filling the report were reporting anything but the facts as they believed them to be true at the time.....)

Bottom line is that you don't know JACK about this incident but what little bit you read.......and you've SHOWN you can't even accurately interpret THAT!

Hey sunshine, you're clearly the one who is clueless here.

The names are in the report I posted the link to.
http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

It's all there. You obviously haven't read a damned thing about this incident.

But here's what happens to officers who think they're better than the rest of us, and don't have to pay attention to the law:
http://media.lvrj.com/images/3546673.jpg

Please don't end up like Officer Manor. Speed kills.

[CMike11]

Jeny and Mac are on the complete polar extreme side.

Jeny is like yeah cops are constantly abusing the poor little citizen

Mac is like hey how dare you challenge or criticize cops yadda yadda yadda.

I think both should unbunch their undies and chill out.

In my OP I asked a simple question to the police officers here. What procedures and checks are in place to counter potential abuses among police officers since they wield so much power? I feel that is a fair question.

Mac I usually enjoy your posts, but you are going way overboard.

[JenyEliza]

The cop made a bad mistake, arresting him in the hospital, Now the city is on the hook for his hospital bills.

The City of Las Vegas is on the hook for more than Mr. Darling's hospital bills. They're going to be writing checks to him for a very long long time.

False arrest, hospital bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, loss of companionship for his wife, actual damages, punitive damages. I could go on and on. It's a lawyers dream.

Officer Manor acted *outside the color of law* when he chose to run his cruiser at 109 mph in a residential area marked for 45 mph with no lights, no siren.

Even his boss has said so:

Gillespie called Manor's speed in the 45-mph zone on Flamingo Road "excessive and unsafe," even if his lights and siren had been on. The facts of the accident probably will alter the charges Darling faces, the sheriff said.

[sgtmac_46]

Sgt, I like you and your posts most of the time. It is at times like this where you are showing what the "thin blue line" does where we part company.

BTW, no judge issued an arrest warrant for Daling's arrest. The arrest was made by the officer at the hospital while Mr. Darling was laying in a hospital bed. Just couldn't wait until a judge was gotten out of bed and reviewed the "facts". And the "facts" as it turned out happened to be made up by other officers trying to cover for one of their own.

You can't make this stuff up and would not be believed if it was put into a tv show or movie. IMHO as always.

They call that an 'Investigative Arrest' where an individual can only be held for a number of hours pending warrant application. Again, it is the way things are done (Changes from state to state.....Federal maximum is 48 hours....Missouri it is 24 hours).....I know these things, but it's clear some of you are kind of fuzzy on it.......they don't explain it on 'Law and Order:SUV' or 'CSI:Milwaukee'.

[sgtmac_46]

Jeny and Mac are on the complete polar extreme side.

Jeny is like yeah cops are constantly abusing the poor little citizen

Mac is like hey how dare you challenge or criticize cops yadda yadda yadda.

I think both should unbunch their undies and chill out.

In my OP I asked a simple question to the police officers here. What procedures and checks are in place to counter potential abuses among police officers since they wield so much power? I feel that is a fair question.

Mac I usually enjoy your posts, but you are going way overboard. If that's what you got from my posts, it's your reading comprehension that is at issue....not my posts. I've taken EXCEPTION with several points of FACT the three of you have asserted.......and you TRANSLATE that to 'Cops do no wrong'......that's the kind of hyperbole I avoid by sticking to the FACTS of individual cases, not "'They' or 'Them' always do this".......LIES hide in general innuendo........the TRUTH is in the details.

[sgtmac_46]

Screwed up? 109 mph is not "he screwed up". That's massively STUPID. Even with the lights and siren on. He endanged his life and the life of EVERY person he passed or encountered in the process. STUPIDITY. So says the guy's boss. You want to prosecute him for it? Be my guest.

The breakdown in the system is that the 2nd responders were taken at their word, they did not wait for the BAC to come back before they charged the man with DUI occasioning death, as well as failure to yield to emergency vehicles (in stealth mode). The 2nd responders LIED when they said lights and siren were going. They were not. They knew this at the time--they were racing each other to the domestic dispute call. The officers in the 2nd car falsified the arrest report/warrant, to cover up their inappropriate behavior (ie, speeding at high rates through residential areas--no lights, no siren against accepted police procedures). That's not a breakdown in the system, genius, the SYSTEM sorted out VERY QUICKLY what happened......and you read about it.

They arrested Mr. Darling while he lay in the hospital bed. He was not DUI. He DID NOT fail to yield. Actually 'DUI' is based on IMPAIRMENT not a number.......but that's over your head.

The charges have NOT yet been dropped--the Chief simply said they are "looking at the original charges". If you have proof to the contrary, please post it. The POH-LICE do not 'Press charges'......again too much TV......PROSECUTORES press charges.....details, details, details.....

You probably ought to do a little research on this incident and get your facts straight before you make yourself look foolish. My facts are straight..........while you can't even interpret a simple report.......and determine the basics of who 'issues warrants' and who 'prosecutes' in our system of government......details, details, details....

[sgtmac_46]

The City of Las Vegas is on the hook for more than Mr. Darling's hospital bills. They're going to be writing checks to him for a very long long time.

False arrest, hospital bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, loss of companionship for his wife, actual damages, punitive damages. I could go on and on. It's a lawyers dream.

Officer Manor acted *outside the color of law* when he chose to run his cruiser at 109 mph in a residential area marked for 45 mph with no lights, no siren.

Even his boss has said so:
False arrest won't fly any further than a lead balloon........they will be on the hook for the collision, however.

[Fire Watch]

Leave the personal attacks out of it.

[sgtmac_46]

Hey sunshine, you're clearly the one who is clueless here.

The names are in the report I posted the link to.
http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

It's all there. You obviously haven't read a damned thing about this incident.

But here's what happens to officers who think they're better than the rest of us, and don't have to pay attention to the law:
http://media.lvrj.com/images/3546673.jpg Actually, you said Supervisor Schmidt approved 'The warrant' not the report......POH-LICE officers do not 'Approve' or 'Issue' or otherwise 'Invent' warrants......JUDGES do.....Government 101. ;)

Please don't end up like Officer Manor. Speed kills. You don't do the same........you're no different when it comes to driving than Officer Manor.

[sgtmac_46]

Leave the personal attacks out of it. My apologies if you're referring to me.

It's as if these three are WANTING a cop to beat up on for this incident so bad they'll take any disagreement with their position in order to declare that 'YOU TOO are a bad cop'.......

Point 1) The officers actions IF he was running at that speed without lights and sirens was seriously negligent

Point 2) IF he in fact did that and survived, he should have been fired.

Point 3) The notion that the fact that the other driver, who WAS drinking, was initially arrested for Driving While Intoxicated is, in fact, some kind of police CONSPIRACY, is ASININE!

Probable cause existed, after failing a field sobriety test, that he was driving a vehicle in an intoxicated and impaired condition.......subsequent evidence revealed his BAC to be BELOW .080%........and that information was released immediately.

[CMike11]

If that's what you got from my posts, it's your reading comprehension that is at issue....not my posts. I've taken EXCEPTION with several points of FACT the three of you have asserted.......and you TRANSLATE that to 'Cops do no wrong'......that's the kind of hyperbole I avoid by sticking to the FACTS of individual cases, not "'They' or 'Them' always do this".......LIES hide in general innuendo........the TRUTH is in the details.

Do you think you are making police officers look good acting this way?

[Fire Watch]

I'm referring to both of you.

[JenyEliza]

Not only was Darling wrongly arrested and charged, he was charged with a FELONY for being in the way of the speeding cop.

http://www.kvbc.com/Global/story.asp?S=10403826&nav=menu107_2


Police say Calvin Darling's blood alcohol level was less than half the legal limit the morning of the crash. In order to be held liable in a felony DUI case causing death or substantial bodily harm, prosecutors would have to prove that Darling was at fault in the crash.

"Metro policy states," says Sheriff Doug Gillespie, "if an officer chooses not to use lights and sirens, he must obey all traffic laws. The speed limit in that area is 45 miles per hour."

And now, we've learned that Metro Officer James Manor did not have his lights and siren on while driving over 100 miles per hour down Flamingo Road.

28-year-old Manor collided with a truck being driven by 45-year-old Calving Darling. Darling survived the crash; Officer Manor did not

His life has been destroyed by the misbehavior of the speeding cop AND the cops who lied about the lights and siren to cover up Officer Manor's misbehavior.

All of this was based on the WORD of cops. NO facts to back them up--they arrested him on the spot. Two lives destroyed.

http://www.ktnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=10400415 (http://www.ktnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=10400415)

Those neighbors say Darling had a career as an engineer at the Bellagio, but
they feel this ordeal has torn his life apart.

"You hate to see his name having been dragged through the mud. I'm glad things are clearing up," said Gordon Thomas, another neighbor who lives near Darling.

Thomas says Darling will always have a hollow spot for the family of officer Manor. He doesn't want anybody to downplay the accident or the tragedy it has caused. At the same time, Thomas feels that Darling was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time.

"I also have two brothers that work for Metro. I can see them standing behind their guy. The first reaction would be, here we have another drunk driver and here's a dead cop. That's just not the case," said Thomas.
Calvin Darling's lawyer, Sean Sullivan, released a brief written statement. It says, in part:

"Thankfully LVMPD came forth with the facts to substantiate my client's statement of how the accident occured. Calvin Darling is a hard working, honest and devoted family man who only wishes to return to his pre-accident life."

Also to mention, Darling was initially arrested and accused of failing to yield to an emergency vehicle and driving under the influence.

He was released from jail the next day after it was revealed that his blood-alcohol level was under the legal limit of .08.

Note how quickly they released him after his BAC came back WELL BELOW the legal limit. Wonder why that is? :think:

[sgtmac_46]

Note how quickly they released him after his BAC came back WELL BELOW the legal limit. Wonder why that is? :think: I thought this was supposed to be some kind of huge police conspiracy......now you're telling me that they released him immediately upon gathering more evidence? Make up your mind!


By the way, which cops LIED........names......which ones? I want to know......if they lied, they deserve to be OUTED!

[sgtmac_46]

Do you think you are making police officers look good acting this way?
Acting what way? Disagreeing with your conclusions? I'm on my own time.......i'm using my SUPER CITIZEN right to free speech. ;)

What I find humorous is that you ASK a question, and then when the only people who actually KNOW the answer give it to you.......you disagree with it......why is that?

[JenyEliza]

Actually, you said Supervisor Schmidt approved 'The warrant' not the report......POH-LICE officers do not 'Approve' or 'Issue' or otherwise 'Invent' warrants......JUDGES do.....Government 101. ;)

Mmmmkay.

You don't do the same........you're no different when it comes to driving than Officer Manor.

Oh, that there's funny! :)) :)) :))

I'd be hard-pressed to get my 1995 Nissan 4 cyl. to go 75-80 mph, much less 109 mph. :)) :)) :))

I don't have a big-block V8 police edition vehicle. You do. Worry about yourself -- and us mere mortals you share the road with.

Then Officer Manor's death won't be in vain.

[sgtmac_46]

Mmmmkay. That's all you have to say about it? Yeah, i'd avoid that topic if I were you too. ;)



Oh, that there's funny! :)) :)) :))

I'd be hard-pressed to get my 1995 Nissan 4 cyl. to go 75-80 mph, much less 109 mph. :)) :)) :))

I don't have a big-block V8 police edition vehicle. You do. Worry about yourself -- and us mere mortals you share the road with.

Then Officer Manor's death won't be in vain. 75 is plenty for you to run me down when i'm standing at the side of the interstate and you're zooming along at 75 and run me over while you're talking on your cell phone and putting on your makeup, yelling at your kids in the backseat.......glad you think it's funny, though.


I've never dealt with any collisions where a police officer has killed anyone.......but i've dealt with a few where police officers were killed by 'mere mortals'......it happens far more than the reverse........either way I don't think it's funny.......I take my responsibilities very seriously........taunt and laugh if you want. I don't require your love to do what I do.

[CMike11]

Acting what way? Disagreeing with your conclusions? I'm on my own time.......i'm using my SUPER CITIZEN right to free speech. ;)

No you are not. You are personally attacking everyone that disagrees with you. That is not your right to free speech. That is a violation of this forum's terms of service.


What I find humorous is that you ASK a question, and then when the only people who actually KNOW the answer give it to you.......you disagree with it......why is that?

Please cite what exactly I disagreed with?

This is a thread about check and balances on potential police officer abuse, the fact that you said you are a police officer, personally attacking everyone that is challenging you, and not showing restraint yourself, doesn't really represent police officers very well. Does it?

[JenyEliza]

My apologies if you're referring to me.

I have tried *very* hard to stick to the facts in the case and not make this personal. Other than calling you "sunshine" and "clueless" in that one post, it has all been about the facts I have found in my research.

It's as if these three are WANTING a cop to beat up on for this incident so bad they'll take any disagreement with their position in order to declare that 'YOU TOO are a bad cop'.......

You don't appear to have done any research on this particular case. You are posting generalities, while I am posting specifics. Specnfics which you ignore.

YOU offered yourself as the sacrificial cop. This thread was not created as a call-out. Nobody is making you post here. If you don't want to be "beaten" by anyone, don't participate. It's just that simple.

Your persecution complex is wearing thin.


Point 1) The officers actions IF he was running at that speed without lights and sirens was seriously negligent

His boss (Sheriff Gillespie) has admitted that he was speeding at the rate of 109 mph in a 45 mph RESIDENTIAL ZONE, with no lights, siren.

What other documentation do you require to accept this as FACT?

Point 2) IF he in fact did that and survived, he should have been fired.

Unfortunately, people tend to die when vehicles hit large pickup trucks at 109 mph:
http://media.lvrj.com/images/3546673.jpg

Point 3) The notion that the fact that the other driver, who WAS drinking, was initially arrested for Driving While Intoxicated is, in fact, some kind of police CONSPIRACY, is ASININE!

That is your opinion. You are entitled to it. You are also entitled to be wrong.

There is evidence to show that Manor and the 2nd responders were racing to the domestic call. The 2nd responders said lights and siren were going in order to pin this tragedy on the innocent citizen Officer Manor hit.

The innocent citizen is damned lucy to be alive. Only now he has a FELONY ARREST on his record for the rest of his life--simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Probable cause existed, after failing a field sobriety test, that he was driving a vehicle in an intoxicated and impaired condition.......subsequent evidence revealed his BAC to be BELOW .080%........and that information was released immediately.

It is simply a fluke that Calvin Darling had *any* alcohol in his system, and those officers caught (what they thought) was a break that offered them a way out of their own dirty deeds that night.

Of course Mr. Darling failed the sobriety test. I would too if someone broad-sided me at 109 mph. I don't think I'd be able to walk straight for a month following, either. And I don't drink or use drugs.

Not only have you claimed (wrongly) that the felony charges have been DROPPED (they haven't), you continue to take an untenable position that Officer Manor had no hand in hastening his own death. This is simply not true. The fault lies at his feet--and nobody elses.

Now, if you don't agree that's fine. If you don't want to "be beaten", then stop responding. The more I research this case, the more convinced I am that my position is correct.

It would be nice if you did a little research on this case and posted some FACTS, rather than just your opinion and personal ad-hom insults aimed at me. I know you can do it -- if you try. :D

[CMike11]

There are two types of people who will post in this thread, besides me.

One group will tear your arms off for even asking the question and the second group will beat you over the head with your bloody arms.
.

:)) I guess you were right.

[sgtmac_46]

No you are not. You are personally attacking everyone that disagrees with you. That is not your right to free speech. That is a violation of this forum's terms of service. Cite the TOS violation i've committed......disagreeing with the three of you is not a violation.




Please cite what exactly I disagreed with? You've done better.......you mischaracterized my position......YOU claim that I made the assertion that cops are never wrong.......but you can't back that up with ONE SINGLE QUOTE of mine......who's wrong?

This is a thread about check and balances on potential police officer abuse, the fact that you said you are a police officer, personally attacking everyone that is challenging you, and not showing restraint yourself, doesn't really represent police officers very well. Does it? I've addressed TWO people who have attacked ME, not 'everyone'........exaggeration and innuendo do not an argument make.

And I would appreciate if you would not make assumptions about my character as a police officer, as you don't know JACK about me.....I could make some character assertions about you if you'd like, and your suitability (or lack thereof) in a professional sense.

[JenyEliza]

Mac....I hope you don't mind, but you're taking this thread SO personally, that I am going to refrain posting responses to you.

I normally agree with you on most things--but in this case I just can't. I don't know what's bugging you today/tonight, but please step away from the keyboard before you get yourself in trouble.

You really *are* going way out on a limb attacking everyone who does not agree with you.

Sorry. :hug:

[sgtmac_46]

It would be nice if you did a little research on this case and posted some FACTS, rather than just your opinion and personal ad-hom insults aimed at me. I know you can do it -- if you try. :D Already researched it, and you WANT me to defend the actions of the dead officer, which I no where have, to the POINT where you have to create a strawman to insinuate I have!

Sorry......pointing out FACTUAL errors on your part, such as confusing a POLICE REPORT with an ARREST WARRANT isn't defending his driving.......or a subsequent officers statements if they weren't true.......you know ONLY what you've read about this incident......which is what the rest of us know.......and I think it's QUITE APPROPRIATE to point out that you've misrepresented some of what you've read based on your lack of knowledge on the subject matter.






Call that an attack if you want.........but it's an attack founded in FACT, not in hyperbole.

[mgifford]

Jeny and Mac are on the complete polar extreme side.

Jeny is like yeah cops are constantly abusing the poor little citizen

Mac is like hey how dare you challenge or criticize cops yadda yadda yadda.

I think both should unbunch their undies and chill out.

In my OP I asked a simple question to the police officers here. What procedures and checks are in place to counter potential abuses among police officers since they wield so much power? I feel that is a fair question.

Mac I usually enjoy your posts, but you are going way overboard.

I believe your "OP" question was answered many times by several officers so far. It's my belief that threads that turn into "I Hate You Because There Are Dirty Cops In My Neighborhood" are useless.

Every officer on this forum can't answer for all the incidents that happen around the country. As I see it, when a poster sees that they can't bamboozle the cops into saying that cops "are dirty", then he/she moves on to another case where, supposedly a dirty cop did something.

Actually, fewer cops disgrace their profession than any other profession, including the Clergy.
I don't know about the past few years, but in the past "LEO have always been in the top three lists of suicide and divorce. One year "Dentists" passed LEO in being number 01 in suicide". However LEO always stayed up there when I was active. More officers are killed by their own guns than any other way.

Divorce is also a category where officers usually were in the top "three". Why? Because when a man/woman starts policing and sees the need for his/her help enforcing the Law putting criminals in jail, they tend to neglect their families to some degree because of the job type.

Now before someone runs to the Internet and finds 12 pages that refute what I said and posts it, don't bother, I won't be impressed.

[sgtmac_46]

I've spent an entire career getting lied about, my actions distorted, second guessed and generally having my integrity impugned by people who don't have the slightest clue what's going on........so if I don't TRUST, at first glance, some allegation made against a police officer with the proper politically correct knee-jerk response, without FULL evidence and FULL disclosure, and don't quickly enough move eat my own before all facts are even in..........please forgive my retched heathen soul.........it's my fault for taking this job in the first place.......which I probably only did because I was picked on in school, or because I was the bully (depending on which posters psychoanalysis you're listening to). :pray:

I do this job because it's a calling.........but I hope my kids become doctors and lawyers.

I do find it amusing that some people think cops can do whatever they want! :)) :)) :))

We live in the most transparent glass house on the planet......you should try it some time.

[CMike11]

I started this thread

My questions were answered

FW I would like to request you lock it