Sunday, December 20, 2009

Police Do Nothing Wrong, Ever...

Long ago, in an episode of 60 Minutes, Andy Rooney started his weekly piece with the question, “Have you noticed that nobody has done anything wrong in the last 20 years?” Andy had it right. Cops got out of the wrongdoing business a long time ago. And we let them. Now police departments from coast to coast believe they are entitled to this umbrella of exemption, but only for themselves. Whatever they say or do is righteous, no matter how many laws are brazenly ignored. Cop culture causes this and it must be brought into submission with some citizen control. Their simple minds have been warped by their upbringing and subsequent training.

Are you as sick of this as I am? Cops cause millions in cash to be taken out of taxpayer’s pockets for settlements, but nothing wrong happened. So let me get this straight---

1) I hire Cop and pay his salary with my tax money.

2) Cop abuses me and breaks law after law after law.

3) Cop is found guilty of crimes against me and I am paid restitution with more of my own tax money.

4) Cop claims he did nothing wrong and walks away.

5) Cop does the same thing tomorrow.

Is that about it?

Is there a newly added level of culpability in the law? First, you’ve got your guilty, then your not guilty, (not to be mixed up with innocent), and now this no wrongdoing thing. I get the first two, but that third one is beyond any reason-based concept of justice and honesty. They did it, but they didn’t? Do anything, be responsible for nothing. What a haven for mental misfits.

One cop said he can hear when a car is speeding, and based on that alone, he issues the ticket.

See what I mean? This guy, Ken Roth, didn’t care about anything but his own superior judgement, which couldn’t be wrong, because there is never cop wro…..well, you get it. BTW, after appeals, the citizen finally won his case.

What bothers me most about this cop is not that he thought so highly of himself that he believes he possesses super hearing, but that he had the nerve to bring his fantasy to court and trot it out as fact. Cop Culture strikes another citizen, another court, another taxpayer. Fortunately in the above case, the citizen prevailed, but the collateral damage in taxpayer time and money was done, and the cop shrugged it off and went back to work the next day, in the face of the court’s ruling that the speeding ticket case was a “manifest miscarriage of justice”.

When it comes to the “no wrong-doing” theory, cops succeed even when sentenced. Cops are always given more preference than citizens. They are found guilty less often, (33% cops, to 68% citizens), and when found guilty, are given lesser sentences which do not include jail, (64% cops to 72% citizens), and when imprisoned, are let out earlier than citizens (6 months cops to 37 months citizens, average). Thanks to Packratt for the stats.

So, when they are found guilty and actually sentenced, they are still not AS guilty of any wrongdoing, even when they do the same things as citizens. Is this a screaming, steaming pile of inequality or what? It all adds up to Cop Culture again. People who can’t cut it as an equal to the citizen, flock to the police academy for solace and are taken in with open arms. They are trained, (aka brainwashed), given deadly weapons and a license to kill, and sent out to believe they are always right.

Folks, we could dismantle and rebuild the police academy, but that would be an absurdly difficult and long-range task to say the least. But best of all, we don’t need it. All it takes is a civilian oversight board, one that can hire and fire. Under the influence of the citizen’s review, police departments, as well as the police academy will slowly but surely comply with the wishes of the people. They will really have no choice, because the people will demand what they want, and cops who do not conform will find themselves working elsewhere. This is the sculpting of the PD that a truly independent citizen review will provide. Consider that, Portland and Antioch.

Police have to get over their planted, knee-jerk fear of citizens, and currently running review boards have to get over their feelings of inadequacy and come of age. Neither are working toward a profitable goal yet, and I want to see them on the same page.

1 comment:

  1. To the author: Get all of the facts straight. This story has been spun by the media. Not all of the officers statements regarding "hearing" the vehicle have been included. The prosecutors in this case chose to continue prosecution after the first guilty finding & the first appeals court remanded the case back to the trial court. Following the dismissal of the radar evidence, the decision to attempt further prosecution based on "hearing" was made by the prosecutor's office. The officer had no knowledge of the appeal nor was he present for the second trial; he was deployed to Iraq at the time. In fact, he didn't learn of any of the appeals until articles like this started popping up & people started calling the department to threaten him & his job. The statements made in regards to "hearing" the vehicle were made in regards to the sound gaining his attention & causing him to believe there was reason to check the approaching vehicle's speed with the radar unit. The radar unit confirmed the vehicle was traveling in excess of the posted speed limit. Why the appeals court decided to dismiss the radar evidence is unexplainable. The debated issue was whether it was a Genesis or Genesis II. The statement of facts (submitted with the citation) identified the unit as a "Genesis radar." The manufacturer of that unit had previously sent an expert to the courts to gain judicial notice of the Genesis line of radar units. Don't blame the absent officer for what other people tried to say using pieces of his testimony. Blame the prosecutor's office that tried, unsuccessfully, to prosecute a speeding case after they lost the radar evidence. Oddly enough, midway through 2010 another Ohio speed case on appeal won notice of an officer's ability to issue a speeding citation based on visual observation alone. Where are the articles decrying the court's decision in that case?