Should this trooper be fired?

"L Sternn" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 06:08:02 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"223rem" > wrote in message
.com...
>>> jaybird wrote:
>>>> "223rem" > wrote in message
>>>> om...
>>>
>>>>>Are you a 'desk' cop?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you guys have internet access in your patrol
>>> cars? Very cool!
>>
>>Hell, we can't even post from there either. I wouldn't want to end up
>>like
>>APD's MDT fiasco from the night club burning down.
>
> APD's always doing something stupid like that.

Always? The last time I remember an MDT incident that made the news was
several years ago. Why must you constantly spread malice and ill-content
about cops?

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:26:08 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:

>> Which is not credible given that he was punished for "inefficient
>> action".
>
>He was punished for conduct unbecoming an officer: "The investigation
>revealed inappropriate and unprofessional language," said Sgt. J. Paul
>Vance, a state police spokesman. His comments did not effect response time.
>

"Peasley....was punished after an internal affairs
investigation for several offenses, including conduct
unbecoming a police officer, inefficient action and lack
of decorum, police said."

>
>>
>> Get those cops to say that under oath.

Indeed. Sgt. Vance was trying to downplay the seriousness of the
situation.

>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If I aim a gun at you and fire, is it okay as long as I miss?
>>>>
>>>> I don't think so.
>>>
>>>Well you've got that one right. Aiming a gun at someone is Deadly
>>>Conduct,
>>>firing it could be many things from Aggravated Assualt to Attempted Murder
>>>whether you hit them or not.... two different scenarios.
>>
>> They're not very different at all. Perhaps he really thought they had
>> already dispatched anyone, but they had not.
>>
>> I should alter my proposed scenario to leave out aiming at you. Let's
>> say you don't know if I aimed it at you or if I was just mishandling
>> it by not following reasonable safety precautions and it happened to
>> be pointed in your general direction when it accidentally went off.
>
>That could still fall under Deadly Conduct which is much different than
>Conduct Unbecoming.

IANAL, but anyone can see that either scenario has the potential to
result in needless death.

Dead is dead, no matter what the law says.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:46:56 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:

>>>Hell, we can't even post from there either. I wouldn't want to end up
>>>like
>>>APD's MDT fiasco from the night club burning down.
>>
>> APD's always doing something stupid like that.
>
>Always? The last time I remember an MDT incident that made the news was
>several years ago. Why must you constantly spread malice and ill-content
>about cops?


Well, there have been riots on 6th Street and then there was the
arrest of Ozomatli last year at SXSW.

Most of the problems do seem to have happened since APD became
"accredited".

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:35:28 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>>>Of course he shouldn't be fired. He's an 18 year veteran with no prior
>>>>disciplinary action. I wouldn't wish a firing on anyone in any
>>>>profession
>>>>with that record, just based on a comment.
>>>
>>> On one hand, you're consistent! <G>
>>
>>I asked myself why that is and came up with a pretty good answer. There
>>are
>>a lot of stories that come through these groups where cops have screwed
>>up.
>>You can read the story and say "yeah, that guy f#$cked up". Then there
>>are
>>stories like this one where someone got their feelings hurt. Well, boo
>>freakin hoo. Suck it up like a man and move on with your life; you'll be
>>ok. Then of course, there are the ones in the middle where we don't quite
>>have all of the information so we go back and forth for weeks with people
>>making up crap and assumptions the whole way.
>
> You mean like "he must have been responding to a call?"

Not necessarily. Remember state law has exemptions......

>
> Sorry, couldn't resist.

That's ok, I understand.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:24:04 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>> Nothing on his record for 18 years? That doesn't mean a thing for a cop.
>>> Cops do awful things all the time and they do not get reported on their
>>> record. It's one of the perks of being a cop, part of job security. You
>>> are
>>> above the system, to a great extent a cop can do whatever he pleases and
>>> receive no punitive response or corrective actions taken against him.
>>> It's
>>> disgusting that these pigs have no respect.
>>
>>That's not exactly true. 18 years is a long time to go with no
>>disciplinary
>>action if you're not doing things the right way. I know you'd like to
>>believe that cops are pieces of s$%t, but cops are held to a much higher
>>standard these days.
>
> There you go being disingenuous again. EVERYBODY knows about the "Code
> of Silence" and how cops cover for each other, don't write each other
> tickets (unless one cop is from IL and the other is from WI), look the
> other way, etc. etc.
>
> However, you may be right about the latter part of your statement: if
> cops are being held to a higher standards THESE DAYS, that might
> explain why this particular trooper was able to get away with
> unprofessional behavior for 18 years without a reprimand.

Oh, here comes the "Code of Silence" cliche again. He screwed up by being
rude.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

"Cartlon Shew" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:26:08 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>> Which is not credible given that he was punished for "inefficient
>>> action".
>>
>>He was punished for conduct unbecoming an officer: "The investigation
>>revealed inappropriate and unprofessional language," said Sgt. J. Paul
>>Vance, a state police spokesman. His comments did not effect response
>>time.
>>
>
> "Peasley....was punished after an internal affairs
> investigation for several offenses, including conduct
> unbecoming a police officer, inefficient action and lack
> of decorum, police said."
>
>>
>>>
>>> Get those cops to say that under oath.
>
> Indeed. Sgt. Vance was trying to downplay the seriousness of the
> situation.
>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If I aim a gun at you and fire, is it okay as long as I miss?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think so.
>>>>
>>>>Well you've got that one right. Aiming a gun at someone is Deadly
>>>>Conduct,
>>>>firing it could be many things from Aggravated Assualt to Attempted
>>>>Murder
>>>>whether you hit them or not.... two different scenarios.
>>>
>>> They're not very different at all. Perhaps he really thought they had
>>> already dispatched anyone, but they had not.
>>>
>>> I should alter my proposed scenario to leave out aiming at you. Let's
>>> say you don't know if I aimed it at you or if I was just mishandling
>>> it by not following reasonable safety precautions and it happened to
>>> be pointed in your general direction when it accidentally went off.
>>
>>That could still fall under Deadly Conduct which is much different than
>>Conduct Unbecoming.
>
> IANAL, but anyone can see that either scenario has the potential to
> result in needless death.
>
> Dead is dead, no matter what the law says.

Sure, but death cannot always be prevented no matter what you do.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:20:03 -0700, L Sternn > wrote:
>
>>>I don't believe that anybody deserves to be treated with disrespect or
>>>hatred just because they are a LEO.
>>
>>I agree, but jaybird's defense of this piece of **** is really making
>>me wonder why.
>
> Jaybird is Jaybird. He is no more representative of all cops than Cory
> is of all us perps.

There ya go! I'm liking your posts today Scott. )

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

"Cartlon Shew" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:46:56 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>>>Hell, we can't even post from there either. I wouldn't want to end up
>>>>like
>>>>APD's MDT fiasco from the night club burning down.
>>>
>>> APD's always doing something stupid like that.
>>
>>Always? The last time I remember an MDT incident that made the news was
>>several years ago. Why must you constantly spread malice and ill-content
>>about cops?
>
>
> Well, there have been riots on 6th Street and then there was the
> arrest of Ozomatli last year at SXSW.

Holy crap, that's all the ammo you have claiming APD stupidity? Those are
marginal situations at the most and are only two out of countless incidents
that happen everyday that are solved without incident. To say and defend
that APD is "always doing something stupid like that" is just not a very
educated statement.

>
> Most of the problems do seem to have happened since APD became
> "accredited".

There have always been issues with departments everywhere because not
everyone likes going to jail, and there will always be a few cops who slip
through the cracks and need to be dealt with. Civil service has helped cops
out a lot with job security and fair promotion standards, but aren't a
reason behind any problems with firing people who have violated the law.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 18:17:23 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Motorhead Lawyer" > wrote in message
roups.com...
>>>
>>> jaybird wrote:
>>>>
>>>> How easy it is for people in this ng to crucify a cop.
>>>
>>> Well, yeah; as long as we got *you* to work with ... =;^)
>>
>>I know, I end up being everyone's target because I'm the only one who
>>cares
>>enough to stick around.
>
> Actually, there are other reasons you are a constant target...
>
>>Other cops have come and gone in here because they
>>don't need to put up with the crap like this guy...
>
> But you put up with worse crap every single day. This USENET stuff
> should roll off like water from a duck's back.

This is just a good oportunity to have a voice. Cops aren't really allowed
to voice an opinion to the public or to violators, they just have to do
their job and move on with their mouth shut; their statements given by
public information officers and attorneys. I can't really call some guy a
prick on the side of the road for arguing about being pulled over, I can't
tell my side of an arrest or complaint that's just made the local news, and
I have to put up with my name being drug through the mud if I'm ever sued,
or complained against. Luckily I haven't had that happen, but I've seen it
tear up co-workers.

>
>>> It might be easier if you let guys like *me* ream Cory when he deserves
>>> it so richly.
>>
>>Naw, we can all gang up on him for being an ass.
>
> Yep - there's nothing like a good USENET pile-on!

He needs it from time to time. )

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 19:10:14 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:

>> IANAL, but anyone can see that either scenario has the potential to
>> result in needless death.
>>
>> Dead is dead, no matter what the law says.
>
>Sure, but death cannot always be prevented no matter what you do.


How did Peasley know that he had time to hang up on 2 callers and let
a different dispatcher send help?