Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would you arrest me?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    What is a DUI
    Since 1992 Officer in Charge

    Comment


    • #32
      I'm on the fence. I could go one way or another depending on other things.

      This Happened last month, and made the news...many upset joe citizens....


      Trooper Lets Deputy Suspected of DUI Go Free Save Email Print
      Internal Affairs investigation underway
      Posted: 5:00 PM Feb 11, 2009
      Last Updated: 10:56 PM Feb 11, 2009
      Reporter: Jodi Baker & Brian Mastre

      The Nebraska State Patrol is conducting an internal investigation after one of its troopers is accused of showing preferential treatment to another law enforcement officer.

      An off-duty Sarpy County sheriff's deputy was pulled over December 20th suspected of drunk driving. But the man in charge of the State Patrol, Col. Bryan Tuma, confirms the deputy was never given a sobriety test, never arrested and was allowed to get a ride home with a friend.

      The allegations come amidst a DWI crackdown by the State Patrol, with a 37-percent increase in arrests last year by Omaha's Troop A alone. It was one of those troopers, Col. Tuma says, who let a suspected drunk driver go. “I believe he acknowledges that he made a mistake."

      "The fact that (the party pulled over) was a law enforcement official may have had some bearing, may have had some influence on his decision of how he followed through."

      "It's a double standard," says UNO Criminal Justice Professor Sam Walker, "because someones getting a break because he's a law enforcement officer."

      The Nebraska State Patrol calls it an isolated incident.

      Colonel Tuma says, "We know that there was alcohol involved and that officer allowed the person to be transported from the scene. Clearly out of context of what we normally do."

      The stop happened after midnight on southbound Interstate 680 at Highway 75. One trooper noticed a car driving without headlights and pulled the driver over.

      The trooper already had a suspect in custody from an earlier stop. “He radioed for assistance, another one of our troopers that was in the area came over and took over the traffic stop," says Col. Tuma.

      That second, unnamed trooper approached the suspect’s vehicle. “There was an odor of alcohol in the vehicle. What's concerning is the trooper didn't follow through exactly the way we would prefer they follow through on one of those types of contacts."

      "Instead of making an arrest or writing a citation or whatever was appropriate for that particular case, didn't occur and that's out of sync with our protocols."

      For all we know -- the deputy who was off-duty and driving without headlights on may have been perfectly sober -- but without a test -- no one really knows.

      The incident is disappointing says Mothers Against Drunk Driving Executive Director Simera Reynolds. "What we want to see is equitable treatment of all offenders. I think that this is a particular event that was unfortunate, but I don't think it's common practice."

      Col. Tuma says his office was told about the situation immediately and the matter was turned over to Internal Affairs. However, the details of that investigation are not being disclosed.

      "The officer will be disciplined here, appropriately, in the not-too-distant future," says Col. Tuma. He calls what happened “an error in judgment,” one which the trooper has admitted to and which is being taken "very seriously."

      Sarpy County Sheriff Jeff Davis says a supervisor in his department was contacted when the off-duty deputy was stopped. He says his office understood the State Patrol would follow whatever steps were called for.

      Since the sheriff’s department discovered protocol was broken, they conducted their own internal investigation. “Appropriate steps were taken with the deputy,” says Davis. He says just what steps were taken are an internal matter and cannot be released to the public. The same for State Trooper.

      "I don't know if this should be a firing offense," says Professor Walker, "but definitely some discipline. There needs to be additional training and a reminder to officers that this isn't acceptable. It's favoritism and 'look the other way' and 'excuse your crime' when we wouldn't do that for somebody else."
      I have neither the time, nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, and then questions the manner by which I provide it. I'd rather you just said thank you, and went on your way!


      They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. But I find it somewhat... distasteful. To be given credit for work that's not mine. Especially inferior work.

      sigpic

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Phelan View Post
        What is a DUI
        Not a "legal term", it is a polite, short slang adopted to describe a certain dangerous criminal behaviour that does not discriminate in it's choice of victims.

        Some places, they call it DWI, or Driving While Intoxicated, the inferrence being alcohol but the actual law as written usually includes any self administered intoxicant or drug.

        We call it DUI, or Driving Under the Influence, and it more accurately inferrs any self administered intoxicant or drug.

        I just use DUI because it's what has always been used here, I never heard anyone use DWI here except for a fellow who moved here from NC and hired on with us, and we retrained him in time.

        Our basic DUI statute (we also have one for operators of CMV and one for under 21 drivers or "baby DUI"):
        § 18.2-266. Driving motor vehicle, engine, etc., while intoxicated, etc.

        It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train (i) while such person has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or more by weight by volume or 0.08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as indicated by a chemical test administered as provided in this article, (ii) while such person is under the influence of alcohol, (iii) while such person is under the influence of any narcotic drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature, or any combination of such drugs, to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, (iv) while such person is under the combined influence of alcohol and any drug or drugs to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, or (v) while such person has a blood concentration of any of the following substances at a level that is equal to or greater than: (a) 0.02 milligrams of cocaine per liter of blood, (b) 0.1 milligrams of methamphetamine per liter of blood, (c) 0.01 milligrams of phencyclidine per liter of blood, or (d) 0.1 milligrams of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine per liter of blood. A charge alleging a violation of this section shall support a conviction under clauses (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v).

        For the purposes of this article, the term "motor vehicle" includes mopeds, while operated on the public highways of this Commonwealth.
        Originally posted by TC2404
        This Happened last month, and made the news...many upset joe citizens....
        Trooper Lets Deputy Suspected of DUI Go Free Save Email Print
        Internal Affairs investigation underway
        Posted: 5:00 PM Feb 11, 2009
        Last Updated: 10:56 PM Feb 11, 2009
        Reporter: Jodi Baker & Brian Mastre

        The Nebraska State Patrol is conducting an internal investigation after one of its troopers is accused of showing preferential treatment to another law enforcement officer.

        ... etc ...

        The stop happened after midnight on southbound Interstate 680 at Highway 75. One trooper noticed a car driving without headlights and pulled the driver over.

        ... etc ...

        Sarpy County Sheriff Jeff Davis says a supervisor in his department was contacted when the off-duty deputy was stopped. He says his office understood the State Patrol would follow whatever steps were called for.

        ... etc ...
        Sure fooled the good Sheriff didn't we (looks like calling that DUI LEO's supervisor didn't work out so well ... Sheriff probably had an applicant already in mind for the soon to be vacant spot.)?

        Glad no one was hurt, could have been a tragic night there on I-680!

        Good case on point ... Thanks for posting it.
        Last edited by t150vsuptpr; 03-11-2009, 11:05 AM.
        "That's right man, we've got mills here that'll blow that heap of your's right off the road."

        "Beautiful Daughter of the Stars."(it's my home now)

        >>>>> A Time for Choosing <<<<<

        Retired @ 31yr 2mo as of 0000 hrs. 01-01-10. Yeah, all in all, it was good.

        Comment


        • #34
          "I don't know if this should be a firing offense," says Professor Walker, "but definitely some discipline. There needs to be additional training and a reminder to officers that this isn't acceptable. It's favoritism and 'look the other way' and 'excuse your crime' when we wouldn't do that for somebody else."
          Who is he to say that "somebody else" might not get a break too?

          There are only several "must-arrest" offenses in my state. Drunk driving is not one of them. I'm all about solving problems for the night in the best way possible. That doesn't always mean that someone gets a ticket or goes to jail. Of course, oftentimes it does.

          This is yet another shallow, holier-than-thou attempt to look "ethical."

          I would be furious with a cop who chose to put me in such a situation, let there be no doubt about that. And like I said earlier, my game plan for such situations is set in stone -- Option A. or Option B. -- take em or leave em.
          Last edited by Resq14; 03-11-2009, 05:19 PM.
          All Gave Some - Some Gave All

          {"data-align":"none","data-size":"custom","data-tempid":"temp_14312_1475388990098_890","height":"65","title":"flower.gif","width":"72"}

          Comment


          • #35
            Every single impaired driver, cop or not, is a homicide waiting to happen. as for professional courtesy how about not putting you fellow officers in this position..

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
              There are only several "must-arrest" offenses in my state. Drunk driving is not one of them.
              I'm sorry to hear that. Especially considering that drunk driving is one of the leading causes of death in the country.
              Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
              This is yet another shallow, holier-than-thou attempt to look "ethical."
              Give me a break! That's just a downright scary attitude! We're not talking about a ticket here, it's a crime, and not a "victimless" one at that!

              Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
              I would be furious with a cop who chose to put me in such a situation, let there be no doubt about that.
              OMG! You'd be furious with the cop who put YOU in that situation???? Wrong, dude. You would be putting the cop in a situation. If you put me in that situation you'd be wearing a set of shiny bracelets and you'd have to live with the short and long-term consequences of your actions. Oh, a third offense is a felony up here too.

              Oh, the guy in my avitar was DUI. He picked an appropriate Halloween costume, eh?
              Last edited by akflyer; 03-11-2009, 06:17 PM.
              The DA/SA handgun: A NAZI solution to a problem that didn't exist!

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by akflyer View Post
                OMG! You'd be furious with the cop who put YOU in that situation???? Wrong, dude. You would be putting the cop in a situation. If you put me in that situation you'd be wearing a set of shiny bracelets and you'd have to live with the short and long-term consequences of your actions. Oh, a third offense is a felony up here too.
                Slow down, champ. You read that backwards. Try reading it "professional courtesy starts with not putting an officer in an awkward situation to begin with." That might clarify it for you.

                And if there is no crash or no injury, there is no victim. As I said before, if there are extenuating circumstances (crash, disorderly) all bets are off.

                I stop drunks all the time. I also see the reality of what happens in court and in administrative hearings. Money buys innocence, and its a joke. There is an extremely small percentage of drunks where I've handled things in a way that didn't involve arrest. It's situational discretion, and it is completely ethical, legal, and above-board.

                I am not (nor is anyone here) suggesting that drunks be allowed to drive off. We ALL are solving the problem for the night. We just have some different ways of doing it.

                As for it being a crime... lol... if I (we) arrested people for every "crime" they committed, I'd (we'd) get laughed out of court... Ya can't have it both ways...

                My problem with these "ethical dilemmas" is that too many people are quick to assume that a certain situation was handled because of the badge WITHOUT acknowledging -- oftentimes, deliberately IGNORING -- the fact that members of the general public are sometimes afforded similar discretion.
                Last edited by Resq14; 03-11-2009, 06:41 PM.
                All Gave Some - Some Gave All

                {"data-align":"none","data-size":"custom","data-tempid":"temp_14312_1475388990098_890","height":"65","title":"flower.gif","width":"72"}

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
                  Slow down, champ. You read that backwards. Try reading it "professional courtesy starts with not putting an officer in an awkward situation to begin with." That might clarify it for you.
                  Thanks for clarifying. I did take that portion of your statement the wrong way. My bad.
                  The DA/SA handgun: A NAZI solution to a problem that didn't exist!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I see it

                    Too many tight *** cops out there! This job isn't your own personal endeavor to enforce every single law on the books without using ANY discretion or providing professional courtesy. A big part of being a police officer is EDUCATING the motoring public in things they do wrong. I'm sure you hardliners will be right there to lock-up your family member (mom, dad, brother, etc) the minute they make a mistake and violate the traffic laws. Any hypocrites out there? As for DUI's, some States still consider this offense a moving violation and NO ARREST is authorized. Heck, in New Jersey we would issue the driver a summons for dwi and send / take them home. NJ now requires the driver be "held" for a certain amount of time or they can be released to a designated driver; who is required to sign a liability release assuming responsibility for the subject.

                    PS: For those that like to advertise to everyone on the radio that they stopped a drunk; STOP IT! That's where you end up getting JACKED! This is your "stop" and it is your decision on whether you will enforce the law or educate the public. And this topic really doesn't need to be addressed in a public forum.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
                      And if there is no crash or no injury, there is no victim.
                      What I'm saying is that the crime in general has more victims than most. There is a high possibility of the worst outcome to this crime. Just because I stopped the driver before damage was inflicted doesn't negate the crime.

                      Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
                      I stop drunks all the time. I also see the reality of what happens in court and in administrative hearings. Money buys innocence, and its a joke.
                      If that's your situation, I'm sorry to hear it. In my world, DUIs get prosecuted whether or not the defendant gets a high-priced lawyer. Yeah, it makes my job a little harder, but that's life and I get paid OT for court.

                      Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
                      As for it being a crime... lol... if I arrested people for every "crime" they committed, I'd get laughed out of court...
                      That sucks. I figure it's the DA's job to dismiss or prosecute. It's my job to arrest for the crime. I use discretion very sparingly with crimes. I would not use "discretion" just because the crime was committed by an LEO. Again, if it's good enough for Joe Citizen, it's good for an LEO.

                      Originally posted by Resq14 View Post
                      My problem with these "ethical dilemmas" is that too many people are quick to assume that a certain situation was handled because of the badge WITHOUT acknowledging that many members of the general public are handled in a similar way.
                      I guess it kind of sucks at times that we're held to a higher standard.
                      The DA/SA handgun: A NAZI solution to a problem that didn't exist!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        One word: Liability.
                        Free Deke O'Mally!!!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          A gang banger with a gun is a homicide waiting to happen, not a DUI. In most States a DUI is a chickenshi## misdemeanor that gets downgraded anyway. I dont even see why guys get all hot and bothered over them. As far as losing your certification..I dont think so..Unless your policy states you shall arrest or your penal or revised statues says you must then you are covered. As long as you are honest about it. If called on the carpet I would ask for a policy that states I must arrest. I am sure some agencies like CHP or some state police agencies have them but I dont have see alot of local agencies having them. I have let cops and civillans alike a break. I would get the cop home by having someone pick him up or have a taxi come down. I have locked civillans keys in the trunk or towed their cars. Unless its an accident, its not worth the problems you will cause for yourself, superiors and that respective agency. Plus if I am off the road for a DUI that means a sex offender, or a gang banger with a misconduct with weapons warrant gets away. I dont wanna hear more people get hurt or killed by DUI crashes,,goto cities liike Baltimore, DC, PG County, LA or Gary Indiana or even Phoenix and see alcohol related accidents compared to people killed or seriously injured by firearms then talk to me. Like SIbpd stated. we are here to educate the public on traffic laws not make money for the state and insurance companies. Everyone has their own opinion on this topic.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by District B 13 View Post
                            One word: Liability.
                            A liability exists if you let them drive away...take them to jail or take them home = no longer a liability.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I stop drunks all the time. I also see the reality of what happens in court and in administrative hearings. Money buys innocence, and its a joke. There is an extremely small percentage of drunks where I've handled things in a way that didn't involve arrest.
                              Sad story about your courts, I can see that your courts have instilled a synical view in you. It's not like that everywhere though. In 30 years I have had exactly one DUI dismissed in circuit court by a jury, he blew a 0.09, I always thought his wife and child sitting on the front row helped him with a couple jurors.
                              It's situational discretion, and it is completely ethical, legal, and above-board.
                              I'm right there with you as I too use "situational discretion" by choice. If the situation is such that they are sufficiently intoxicated and I catch them DUI, I arrest them.
                              A gang banger with a gun is a homicide waiting to happen, not a DUI. In most States a DUI is a chickenshi## misdemeanor that gets downgraded anyway. I dont even see why guys get all hot and bothered over them.
                              Third within ten years of a first conviction is felony here, judges hammer them either way. Seen too many hurt and killed by DUI drivers. Don't wish them any harm, just that they get caught and brought to justice before some innocent pays the cost. No sympathy here for them, none of them. Just isn't in me.
                              I guess it kind of sucks at times that we're held to a higher standard.
                              Only in some aspects, and not DUI. Exact same presumptive levels, same punishments, all "same same", no mention of LEO or JQP. Truck drivers are arguably held to a higher standard.
                              "That's right man, we've got mills here that'll blow that heap of your's right off the road."

                              "Beautiful Daughter of the Stars."(it's my home now)

                              >>>>> A Time for Choosing <<<<<

                              Retired @ 31yr 2mo as of 0000 hrs. 01-01-10. Yeah, all in all, it was good.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                lets see........ Losing your job VS. Losing my job..............sorry buddy hope you can find something to make you some money because ill be back at work tomorrow.


                                also, in NC, DWI stands for Driving While Impaired (not intoxicated). the impaired terminology covers all drugs and alcohol.

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 6313 users online. 385 members and 5928 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X