Ad JS

Collapse

Leaderboard

Collapse

Leaderboard Tablet

Collapse

Leaderboard Mobile

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Background Investigation For Civilian Position with Police Department

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • Background Investigation For Civilian Position with Police Department

    Hello all,

    I passed the selection process for a civilian Information Technology position with a police department. There is a ranking of the applicants based on their test scores and my scores placed me in the top 2 on the eligibility list.

    The next step is the comprehensive background investigation. I do not have a criminal record at all. My question is this: I had a temporary protection order placed against me by a person in 2015. That protection order expired and went away as the police officer told me when he handed it to me. Then in 08/2016 I had an extended protection order placed against me. I was handed the court document by the process server and the judge set it to expire 2 months after it was served to me. I did not violate the terms of either one.


    My question is if that if those 2 orders are the only things I have that will be red flags, will these be disqualifying me from being hired?

    Thank you

  • #2
    Protection orders are not issued unless a court finds you have engaged in threatening or other antisocial behavior, directed towards another, that society finds unacceptable. Such conduct alone is usually grounds for disqualification on a background.

    If the conduct that resulted in the protection order suggests you may lack the the general qualifications of integrity, honesty, sobriety, dependability, industry, thoroughness, accuracy, good judgment, initiative, resourcefulness, courtesy, or an ability to work cooperatively with others, its a good chance you will be disqualified.

    Going too far is half the pleasure of not getting anywhere

    Comment


    • #3
      Rest assured that IF the Background Investigator is worth a crap, he will review those orders; he will speak with the Petitioners and review any associated police reports. I know that I would take these steps as well as a few more that I will not disclose here. This is more than a 'red flag', this is a huge beacon.

      “This life’s hard, but it’s harder if you’re stupid.”

      George V. Higgins--The Friends of Eddie Coyle

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks for the responses.

        Originally posted by L-1 View Post
        If the conduct that resulted in the protection order suggests you may lack the the general qualifications of integrity, honesty, sobriety, dependability, industry, thoroughness, accuracy, good judgment, initiative, resourcefulness, courtesy, or an ability to work cooperatively with others, its a good chance you will be disqualified.
        The conduct that resulted in the protection order was that I sent him a series of emails. He initiated the protection orders to stop me emailing him. I sent them because I was angry at the time at him and that was the only way I wanted to release my anger. Fortunately, I learned my lesson now and I am sorry to him.

        I hold excellent skills in my profession and have demonstrated a solid career record in my field which I would contribute to the police department. All things considered, it's hard for me to believe that these 2 incidents will outshine my entire life history where there is no criminal record.

        Comment


        • #5
          How does the agency know it won't happen again..? And now you have IT access.
          Now go home and get your shine box!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by abr1001 View Post



            . All things considered, it's hard for me to believe that these 2 incidents will outshine my entire life history where there is no criminal record.
            I can understand why you would think this.....................

            However, in the law enforcement profession we are extremely careful who we employ ESPECIALLY in a high profile position.

            Quite frankly as a cop candidate you would probably be toast..........EVEN with no "criminal record" Few police administrators are going to be willing to sign off on hiring a person who hash ONE much less TWO protective orders placed against them in the past.

            No administrator want to be the one that hires the next Drew Peterson

            As a civilian employee.................the threshold will probably be less That will TOTALLY be up to the agency.


            HINT: My sheriff would not employ you.
            Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

            My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS


            (F*** Off Cuz Ur Stupid)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Iowa #1603 View Post

              I can understand why you would think this.....................

              However, in the law enforcement profession we are extremely careful who we employ ESPECIALLY in a high profile position.

              Quite frankly as a cop candidate you would probably be toast..........EVEN with no "criminal record" Few police administrators are going to be willing to sign off on hiring a person who hash ONE much less TWO protective orders placed against them in the past.

              No administrator want to be the one that hires the next Drew Peterson

              As a civilian employee.................the threshold will probably be less That will TOTALLY be up to the agency.


              HINT: My sheriff would not employ you.
              As an agency administrator, I can tell you that there is a huge vicarious liability in a situation such as this. The majority of lawsuits (at least the ones with any merit) are based on negligent hiring practices, negligent entrustment, failure to train and failure to supervise. The vetting process is critical to law enforcement hiring and I wouldn't want to be the one who signs off on a candidate with a history of harassing someone electronically ESPECIALLY if he is an IT person.

              We can minimize your actions all day long and say that it was a long time ago; you're not that person any more, etc. Since you weren't CONVICTED of anything as a result, it could be innocuous, BUT there are a hundred guys with your education & qualifications applying for the same job and they don't have any baggage. They at least start with a clean-slate and I wouldn't get sued if I hired one of them and they started harassing someone as long as I took steps to correct it and/or terminate that person.



              “This life’s hard, but it’s harder if you’re stupid.”

              George V. Higgins--The Friends of Eddie Coyle

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by abr1001 View Post
                Thanks for the responses.



                The conduct that resulted in the protection order was that I sent him a series of emails. He initiated the protection orders to stop me emailing him. I sent them because I was angry at the time at him and that was the only way I wanted to release my anger. Fortunately, I learned my lesson now and I am sorry to him.

                I hold excellent skills in my profession and have demonstrated a solid career record in my field which I would contribute to the police department. All things considered, it's hard for me to believe that these 2 incidents will outshine my entire life history where there is no criminal record.
                There is an old saying which might apply in your case at present. Ready?...........One aww sh...t wipes out a thousand "atta-boys". Stated another way, all of your well documented education and proficiency in the IT field, go right down the proverbial crapper. This, due to the lack of judgement which proceeded the Protective Order.

                L-1, my colleague, has done his usual excellent job of analyzing your particular situation, and explaining to you why you're very likely, high likely to be disqualified as a result of your action(s).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thank you all for your responses. I will still do my best to earn the position based on my skills, job experience, and other factors which prove that I am very qualfied for the position.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Not one, but TWO orders...
                    Now go home and get your shine box!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by abr1001 View Post
                      Thank you all for your responses. I will still do my best to earn the position based on my skills, job experience, and other factors which prove that I am very qualfied for the position.
                      You're not getting it. It's NOT a case of your not being qualified. it's a case of not merely one, but two incidents of poor judgement being called to the attention of the courts, and the court issuing not one, but two orders as a result of your conduct. THAT is where your problem lies. That is going to be very difficult, almost impossible to overcome.

                      This will be especially true if there are other equally qualified applicants who don't bring your issues to the table.

                      Comment

                      MR300x250 Tablet

                      Collapse

                      What's Going On

                      Collapse

                      There are currently 13291 users online. 484 members and 12807 guests.

                      Most users ever online was 19,482 at 11:44 AM on 09-29-2011.

                      Welcome Ad

                      Collapse
                      Working...
                      X