Cop gets LTC suspended

My concern isn't so much with the question of whether police officers names should be reported in situations such as this.

My question is why someone who's been arrested and charged with a violent felony should be working as a police officer, whether on restricted duty or not. I know all about innocent until proven guilty, and think it should apply to police as much as anybody else. But I'm not talking about locking him up without a trial, simply about suspending him until the entire matter is resolved. The fact that he was arrested and charged strongly suggests that there's some credible reason for concern.

Ken

There may be union or contractual issues here. Placing him on restricted duty rather than suspension with or without pay may not be an option due to the circumstances and how the contract is worded. I don't know. On the other hand while your point is valid, the department is undermanned so using someone in a restricted duty category puts a fully qualified officer back out on the street by replacing that officer with one in restricted duty status. (at least in theory, he might just be doing something that is 'make-work" or doing something normally done by a civilian admin person).

Mark056
 
If a non-leos info can be printed, than so can a leo's. There is no reason to make a special exception for either. A leo does not ( I should probably say should not) have any different rights than anyone else.

+1

Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.

I believe everybody should be treated exactly the same. No exceptions. I don't like that they put his info out there but if they can do it to us then they should be able to do it to them. The whole "exceptions" thing is the reason why we have LEO marked magazines and a whole lot of other hassles that would never have been given a second thought if there weren't some sort of LEO exemption clause.
 
Back
Top Bottom