Tweet
Off-duty Conduct
Good Evening,
I am a Graduate Student working on a Case Study. I have to do an analysis of a true case: The Cop and the Prostitute.
The case concerns a Sgt. and a known prostitute/addict. The Sgt. had recently been awarded the departments Medal of Meritorious Service for his bravery in saving the life of a fellow officer during a drug bust gone bad.
But, this was the second internal affairs investigation being conducted into the Sgt.'s relationship with the prostitute. He met her when he was working in Vice, and learned about her profession and habit, and decided to use her as a decoy to catch the leaders of the drug-trafficking rings.
This began in 1998 through 2002. They had a social relationship, that eventually became intimate. He was constantly helping her when she got into trouble, and supporting her when she tried to kick her drug habit. She would sometimes stay at his house, and he even allowed her six-year old son to sometimes stay. And sometimes her four-year old also.
He lent her his car to do some errands on a Friday, and didn't hear from her until that Monday night, minus the car. He wanted her to go to a shelter, she wouldn't, and was banging on his door, so he stated he called his Lt.. He finally let her inside, only to give her some blankets and inform her that she needed to go somewhere else, finally he contacted a shelter that came and picked her up. She called him the next day, and he told her that he could no longer help her.
In June, 2002, he again contacted his Lt., (who was at home) to state that the woman was there at his house, and he could not get her to leave. The Domestic Abuse Responce Team (DART) was sent, and took the woman away. The Sgt.and the woman were ordered not to contact each other. He was advised by both his Captain and Lt., to stay away from the woman. But, he was not given a direct order, either in writing or verbally, to not see the woman.
In 2002 also, after this advise was given to him, he picked the woman up and took her to an apartment to retrieve some of her things from a friend. This same apartment complex was under surveillance by undercover police officers, who traced the car as belonging to the Sgt. He was subsequently given a 40 day suspension w/o pay for violation of SOP 1-04-1, Personal Code Of Conduct, and 1-04-6, Conduct Both On and OFF Duty.
Internal Affairs was again investigating him because of his personal relationship with this woman. The 2003-04 Investigation revealed: On 11/17/03, the Sgt. reported that his vehicle was not returned by the woman after loaning it to her on 11/15/03. On 11/16/03, while in the woman's posession, was listed as a suspect vehicle in a commercial burglary. The woman has an extensive criminal history of charges involving drug use, trafficking, theft, and prostitution. Only one of the charges resulted in an actual conviction. And there are no current felony investigations.
The Sgt. admitted that he knew of her reputation at the time that he was previously disciplined for his involvement with her. He admitted to IA, that the woman had been staying at his home since the last part of 7/03, after he had gotten into trouble because of her visiting a drug dealer. And the reason for her staying at his home, SHE HAD A BABY FOR HIM... Seems, that she was pregnant when he was being disciplined by the IA the first time concerning her. He only told his LT., that the woman was pregnant. When asked about being given a verbal directive from The Captain and the LT., the Sgt. didn't see it as being a verbal directive, but as informal advice coming from two friends. He didn't sign any directive or order, except the Notice of Discipline he received in early 2003.
Also, in 2002, he got a 40 hr. suspension, from the Deputy Chief. The Chief thought that this would end the relationship. But this was not a direct order, either verbally or in writing, asking his to stop his contact with the woman.
As a final part of the IA's investigation, he decided to interview the woman. The woman stated that she loved the Sgt., she should have left him alone, and not jeopardize his career. That he is a very good man. When she was with him she was straight, and not the druggie and whore that others saw her to be. And she wanted to help him any way that she could. And asked if there was anything that she could do, to let her know. The IA said: "well, it's a difficult thing for us to do, to investigate one of our own officers". The Woman responded: "He doesn't deserve to be investigated, I do. I just want to know what's going to happen to him. He's a very good guy...., This guy really cares and wants to help. Do you know how many cops out there date hookers and they do this and do that? He's not like that. So why is this finger being pointed at him?".
After the interview the IA came to the realization that he would be compelled by the facts to find the Sgt. had violated each of the departmental SOP's, as charged.
With the case analysis I need to:
1. state the reasons why I would either agree or disagree with the IA's decision to find the Sgt. guilty of violating the departments SOP's.
2. If I, was the Captain or Lt., how would I have handled the situation with the Sgt. following the incident in 2002 at the apartment complex?
3. To what extent should public employers be allowed to regulate off-duty behavior of employees, particularly police officers, without intruding upon an employee's constitutional right to privacy?
I would appreciate any comments concerning the case from anyone. Or Law Enforcement officer who could give me their view/opinion on the case.
Thanks,
Student58
I am a Graduate Student working on a Case Study. I have to do an analysis of a true case: The Cop and the Prostitute.
The case concerns a Sgt. and a known prostitute/addict. The Sgt. had recently been awarded the departments Medal of Meritorious Service for his bravery in saving the life of a fellow officer during a drug bust gone bad.
But, this was the second internal affairs investigation being conducted into the Sgt.'s relationship with the prostitute. He met her when he was working in Vice, and learned about her profession and habit, and decided to use her as a decoy to catch the leaders of the drug-trafficking rings.
This began in 1998 through 2002. They had a social relationship, that eventually became intimate. He was constantly helping her when she got into trouble, and supporting her when she tried to kick her drug habit. She would sometimes stay at his house, and he even allowed her six-year old son to sometimes stay. And sometimes her four-year old also.
He lent her his car to do some errands on a Friday, and didn't hear from her until that Monday night, minus the car. He wanted her to go to a shelter, she wouldn't, and was banging on his door, so he stated he called his Lt.. He finally let her inside, only to give her some blankets and inform her that she needed to go somewhere else, finally he contacted a shelter that came and picked her up. She called him the next day, and he told her that he could no longer help her.
In June, 2002, he again contacted his Lt., (who was at home) to state that the woman was there at his house, and he could not get her to leave. The Domestic Abuse Responce Team (DART) was sent, and took the woman away. The Sgt.and the woman were ordered not to contact each other. He was advised by both his Captain and Lt., to stay away from the woman. But, he was not given a direct order, either in writing or verbally, to not see the woman.
In 2002 also, after this advise was given to him, he picked the woman up and took her to an apartment to retrieve some of her things from a friend. This same apartment complex was under surveillance by undercover police officers, who traced the car as belonging to the Sgt. He was subsequently given a 40 day suspension w/o pay for violation of SOP 1-04-1, Personal Code Of Conduct, and 1-04-6, Conduct Both On and OFF Duty.
Internal Affairs was again investigating him because of his personal relationship with this woman. The 2003-04 Investigation revealed: On 11/17/03, the Sgt. reported that his vehicle was not returned by the woman after loaning it to her on 11/15/03. On 11/16/03, while in the woman's posession, was listed as a suspect vehicle in a commercial burglary. The woman has an extensive criminal history of charges involving drug use, trafficking, theft, and prostitution. Only one of the charges resulted in an actual conviction. And there are no current felony investigations.
The Sgt. admitted that he knew of her reputation at the time that he was previously disciplined for his involvement with her. He admitted to IA, that the woman had been staying at his home since the last part of 7/03, after he had gotten into trouble because of her visiting a drug dealer. And the reason for her staying at his home, SHE HAD A BABY FOR HIM... Seems, that she was pregnant when he was being disciplined by the IA the first time concerning her. He only told his LT., that the woman was pregnant. When asked about being given a verbal directive from The Captain and the LT., the Sgt. didn't see it as being a verbal directive, but as informal advice coming from two friends. He didn't sign any directive or order, except the Notice of Discipline he received in early 2003.
Also, in 2002, he got a 40 hr. suspension, from the Deputy Chief. The Chief thought that this would end the relationship. But this was not a direct order, either verbally or in writing, asking his to stop his contact with the woman.
As a final part of the IA's investigation, he decided to interview the woman. The woman stated that she loved the Sgt., she should have left him alone, and not jeopardize his career. That he is a very good man. When she was with him she was straight, and not the druggie and whore that others saw her to be. And she wanted to help him any way that she could. And asked if there was anything that she could do, to let her know. The IA said: "well, it's a difficult thing for us to do, to investigate one of our own officers". The Woman responded: "He doesn't deserve to be investigated, I do. I just want to know what's going to happen to him. He's a very good guy...., This guy really cares and wants to help. Do you know how many cops out there date hookers and they do this and do that? He's not like that. So why is this finger being pointed at him?".
After the interview the IA came to the realization that he would be compelled by the facts to find the Sgt. had violated each of the departmental SOP's, as charged.
With the case analysis I need to:
1. state the reasons why I would either agree or disagree with the IA's decision to find the Sgt. guilty of violating the departments SOP's.
2. If I, was the Captain or Lt., how would I have handled the situation with the Sgt. following the incident in 2002 at the apartment complex?
3. To what extent should public employers be allowed to regulate off-duty behavior of employees, particularly police officers, without intruding upon an employee's constitutional right to privacy?
I would appreciate any comments concerning the case from anyone. Or Law Enforcement officer who could give me their view/opinion on the case.
Thanks,
Student58
Comment