Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Officer investigated for "Tiregate"

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • Stickcop
    replied
    Originally posted by My Gluttony
    My first and only bit of advice would be to not talk about this in a public internet forum
    I wont, dont worry...

    Leave a comment:


  • My Gluttony
    replied
    My first and only bit of advice would be to not talk about this in a public internet forum

    Leave a comment:


  • Stickcop
    replied
    The officer being investigated has 13 years in, and the officer making the complaint has a little over 1 year.

    The officer making the complaint did the same thing while inn the academy, and at the first department she worked for. Its a never ending thing.

    Dont get me wrong. I do NOT have anything against female officers. After all, I'm married to one.

    On the other hand, the department does not have a policy for anything. The latest policies are from 1984, and involve mostly off duty work and what you can wear to work...Imagine that.


    Stick

    Leave a comment:


  • Stickcop
    replied
    Originally posted by VSPClem
    Really strange, all I will say is this.

    Virginia is the same as Florida. If there is going to be any type of criminal investigation, it must come before the IA investigation, so either this story has holes in it, or you work for a dpt that doesnt understand basic criminal law.
    I think the latter is true. Our boss' answer to anything that may be questionable is " Be patient, I think we'll be alright".

    He knows his law, from the late 80s. But since he has been Chief, he just does as he pleases and hopes no one is smart enough to know he is breaking the law.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stickcop
    replied
    Originally posted by MPSRT
    The whole thing sounds dumb, which actually make me think it didn't happen, but then why would another officer claim it did? Not enough info to evaluate this really. What info would you expect us to give you he does not already know? He needs to contact FOP or a good lawyer or both if his job is on the line.
    Honestly this makes me think the whole thing is BS.
    I can promise you that it is true...the whole thing. That is what the boss said word for word.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stickcop
    replied
    Originally posted by lifesaving123
    If the officer filing the complaint wasn't there and didn't see anything, then why is he filing a complaint?

    She is filing the complaint because she has had a long time bout with the officer, and she thought that since he was alone with the car and it had two low tires, that she would cause him some problems...And it worked.

    Leave a comment:


  • lifesaving123
    replied
    If the officer filing the complaint wasn't there and didn't see anything, then why is he filing a complaint?

    Leave a comment:


  • VSPClem
    replied
    Originally posted by Stickcop
    I know of an offcier who is being investigated for supposedly "lowering the tires", by letting air out, of a suspect's get away vehicle. No pucturing device was suposedly used. And the tires were not flattened. The suspect made no complaint. The complaint come from an officer that was not on scene at any time.

    During the investigation, the Cheif of Police said that he had no choice but to investigate the claim because the man was black.

    He also did not advise the officer of Garrity, or his miranda before the interview. Then he told the officer, prior to the interview, that it was an administrative investigation, but the criminal would come later.

    Anyone have any advice I can give the guy. Its still going on, this is week three.

    LJ
    Really strange, all I will say is this.

    Virginia is the same as Florida. If there is going to be any type of criminal investigation, it must come before the IA investigation, so either this story has holes in it, or you work for a dpt that doesnt understand basic criminal law.

    Leave a comment:


  • PD602
    replied
    Originally posted by Stickcop
    I know of an offcier who is being investigated for supposedly "lowering the tires", by letting air out, of a suspect's get away vehicle. No pucturing device was suposedly used. And the tires were not flattened. The suspect made no complaint. The complaint come from an officer that was not on scene at any time.

    During the investigation, the Cheif of Police said that he had no choice but to investigate the claim because the man was black.

    He also did not advise the officer of Garrity, or his miranda before the interview. Then he told the officer, prior to the interview, that it was an administrative investigation, but the criminal would come later.

    Anyone have any advice I can give the guy. Its still going on, this is week three.

    LJ
    Can't think of any good reasons to let the air out of a suspect's tires. Seems like a poor lack of judgement if the officer indeed did do it.

    Never heard of having to investiate a complaint just because the person was black or white or whatever color.

    In Florida if one determines a criminal act may have occurred during an administrative review or an internal investigation the review or internal ceases and the criminal investigation takes presedence. After the completion of the criminal then the review or internal investigation commences again. One cannot use what they discover during an internal against an officer in a criminal proceeding.

    If the officer feels his garrity or miranda was violated have him get an attorney or at least a union representative if your department has a union.

    Hope this helps.

    Leave a comment:


  • MPSRT
    replied
    The whole thing sounds dumb, which actually make me think it didn't happen, but then why would another officer claim it did? Not enough info to evaluate this really. What info would you expect us to give you he does not already know? He needs to contact FOP or a good lawyer or both if his job is on the line.
    During the investigation, the Cheif of Police said that he had no choice but to investigate the claim because the man was black.
    Honestly this makes me think the whole thing is BS.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stickcop
    replied
    Originally posted by Frank Booth
    It was a dumb thing to do. If there was a chase that went on for any length, there's a good chance that the tires would have blown out casing immediate loss of control of the car. The number one cause of catastrophic tire failure is under-inflation. The cords in the sidewalls heat up, then melt and the tire blows. He would have been better off flattening them.

    Placing the bad guy or innocent bystanders in a position to be killed over a domestic moonshining is a dumb idea. If he actually did it, tell him to take his medicine like a man.

    Thats his point. He didn't do it. He said if he had wanted to take the car out, he sure wouldnt have sat there and took the time to let the air out with his finger, or what ever. He said he would have stuck a blade in them and been done with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    It was a dumb thing to do. If there was a chase that went on for any length, there's a good chance that the tires would have blown out casing immediate loss of control of the car. The number one cause of catastrophic tire failure is under-inflation. The cords in the sidewalls heat up, then melt and the tire blows. He would have been better off flattening them.

    Placing the bad guy or innocent bystanders in a position to be killed over a domestic moonshining is a dumb idea. If he actually did it, tell him to take his medicine like a man.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stickcop
    replied
    The man was wanted for Domestic Assault and possession of Moonshine. He had been hiding for about a month and they knew where he was and found his car parked behind a church across the street.

    Several officers set up on the car waiting for it to leave. They finally gave up. About 30 mins later one of the officers saw him leave and followed him 8/10ths of a mile before he would stop.

    He was then arrested. He made no complaint, except his window had been broken out and his tires slashed on an earlier date. There was no damage to the vehicle, and there was no restricted movement.

    Plus, the officer insists he did nothing to the car. He has been there 9 years, and the officer making the complaint has been there for 1.

    Go figure....

    I also found this code section:

    § 33.1-345. Cutting or injuring trees near highways, injuring bridges, markers, etc.; obstructing roads, etc.

    Any person shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor who shall:

    (1) Cut or injure a tree within fifty feet of a road so as to render it liable to fall and leave it standing;

    (2) Knowingly and willfully, without lawful authority, break down, destroy or injure any bridge or log placed across a stream for the accommodation of pedestrians;

    (3) Obstruct any road or any ditch made for the purpose of draining any such road;

    (4), (5) [Repealed.]

    (6) Willfully or maliciously displace, remove, destroy or injure any highway sign or historical marker or any inscription thereon lawfully within a highway;

    (7) Put or cast into any public road any glass, bottles, glassware, crockery, porcelain or pieces thereof, or any pieces of iron or hard or sharp metal, or any nails, tacks or sharp-pointed instruments of any kind, likely in their nature to cut or puncture any tire of any vehicle or injure any animal traveling thereon. This subdivision shall not apply to the use of any tire deflation device by a law-enforcement officer while in the discharge of his official duties, provided the device was approved for use by the Division of Purchase and Supply.
    (8) [Repealed.]

    (Code 1950, § 33-279; 1956, c. 676; 1970, c. 322; 1972, c. 65; 1980, c. 141; 1981, c. 19; 1988, c. 79; 1989, c. 727; 1997, c. 136.)
    Last edited by Stickcop; 06-15-2006, 10:15 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MPSRT
    replied
    Very strange, why would he do that? How was it a "get away vehicle"?

    Leave a comment:


  • FNA209
    replied
    What exactly were the circumstances?

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 4065 users online. 194 members and 3871 guests.

Most users ever online was 19,482 at 12:44 PM on 09-29-2011.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X