Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Objectivity

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • Objectivity

    I have noticed here, a tendency for many to go out of their way to defend the actions of LEOs. I can understand that we want to protect each other and cover each others backs but there is some value in stepping back and being objective. It is a good thing to train on and I have done a fair amount of training of LEOs so that opinion is based on experience. So approach the following as a training exercise. You just heard the news about this and read the article in the paper. You come in and the captain calls you in and tells you that since you never worked with the officer that the investigation is yours. How do you handle it?

    Woman dies saving her baby from car crash

    A woman died saving her 10-month-old baby during a road accident that also involved a policeman along Taft Avenue, Manila Wednesday night.

    Jocelyn Estubo was able to toss 10-month-old Karl to safety before being hit by a Toyota Fortuner being driven by Police Officer 2 Reynaldo Ortiz.

    The accident took place around 7:30 p.m. Wednesday at the intersection of Quirino and Taft avenues.

    The baby miraculously survived the accident, only suffering minor bruises.

    His mother, however, was not as lucky. She died while being treated at the nearest hospital.

    Ortiz, an operative of the Police Anti-Crime and Emergency Response (PACER), claimed the accident was not his fault since Estubo tried crossing the street while the green light was on.

    The victim’s sister refuted the policeman’s claim, citing witnesses who said that Ortiz was trying to beat the red light and was driving fast.

    The victim’s relatives, meanwhile, were thankful that the baby survived the accident.

    Ortiz is now facing charges of reckless imprudence resulting to homicide. With a report from Maan Macapagal, ABS-CBN News

  • #2
    i do not think this is a type of "defending an LEO" situation with such little information. sounds like a tragic accident to me. obviously someone is at fault, either the lady or the officer but that is yet to be found out. until we know more information about what happened i do not think we have enough to try and defend anyone.
    This is my Glock, there are many like it, but this one is mine

    "Anything is possible to he who dares" A.G. Spalding

    Comment


    • #3
      Objectivity is something we do for our entire careers, CMR. What you've posed here isn't a fair question. Objectivity on this forum, from the point of view of a LEO, is pointing out on these numerous threads that second guessing and Monday morning quarterback the actions of a LEO with only one side of the story is the opposite of objectivity. It's not about refusing to believe that we make mistakes; it's refusal to degrade and second guess a fellow professional when all the facts aren't known.

      However, in the instance of the above the answer is simple. I would investigate the case. What more would you want?
      sigpic

      I don't agree with your opinion, but I respect its straightforwardness in terms of wrongness.

      Comment


      • #4
        "You just heard the news about this and read the article in the paper. You come in and the captain calls you in and tells you that since you never worked with the officer that the investigation is yours. How do you handle it?"

        and?

        Comment


        • #5
          you also once posted that the forum is full of racist remarks...none of which i've ever seen by the way. why do you feel the need to post nonsense and foolishness to stir the pot? i'm tired of your shenanigans.
          Perseverate In Pugna

          Comment


          • #6
            I have noticed here, a tendency for many to go out of their way to defend the actions of LEOs.

            I'm sure if you go to an anti-leo site you may find the opposite. We come here because it's Officer.com, not officer bashing.com. When a scenario is presented, of course we'd like to think our coworkers did their job and attempt to explain why it may seem otherwise. If someone's wrong, well they're wrong, however, I think we can all agree the information put forth by the media is'nt necassarily complete or correct. Because of that and my experience, I generally discount media reports and, like anyone who's conducted investigations knows that they're unreliable, "eyewitness" accounts.

            I think if we visit a biker website, or dentists, or whatever (just for example) we could find posts defending their actions to the general public (those who are'nt trained or experienced in that profession or activity) as well.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by cmr164 View Post
              "You just heard the news about this and read the article in the paper. You come in and the captain calls you in and tells you that since you never worked with the officer that the investigation is yours. How do you handle it?"and?
              You handle it like any other investigation: Thoroughly and completely.

              Is there some other way you'd expect it to be handled?
              "I'm not fluent in the language of violence, but I know enough to get around in places where it's spoken."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by pulicords View Post
                You handle it like any other investigation: Thoroughly and completely.

                Is there some other way you'd expect it to be handled?
                Hopefully you will have a little more detail to the answers when you think them over.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Narco944 View Post
                  you also once posted that the forum is full of racist remarks...none of which i've ever seen by the way. why do you feel the need to post nonsense and foolishness to stir the pot? i'm tired of your shenanigans.
                  Here is why keeping objectivity is paramount. A lack of it clouds the ability to perceive evidence. Personal likes and dislikes as well as various prejudices tend to cloud the ability to see clearly.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Sorry, but I smell a set up on this one. You don't hand a fatal accident investigation off to a single officer at random, let alone a fatal involving a government official where allegations of misconduct have been made. Instead, it goes to a multi discipline accident investigation unit or a fatal accident investigation unit that has the expertise to analyze all the data, evidence and statements and sift through the BS to come to a reasonable conclusion as to what really happened . Even small agencies that lack this resource have the wisdom to ask for help from a bigger one that does, and have them conduct the investigation for them.

                    The Philippines may be a third world country, but somewhere in their police hierarchy there has to be someone with the expertise to properly handle such an investigation. I don't think anyone here is going to buy into your "handing this investigation off to a random cop" scenario, for an event this significant where public trust is on the line.
                    Going too far is half the pleasure of not getting anywhere

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      "The victim’s sister refuted the policeman’s claim, citing witnesses who said that Ortiz was trying to beat the red light and was driving fast."

                      Ah, well, now that makes it a lot easier. After all, the "victim's" sister wouldn't lie - would she?

                      And since the sister got all the information and did the investigation, done deal.

                      Investigation finished. Cop is guilty.
                      Next case!


                      (Ummm, was that the answer you were looking for?)


                      .
                      "Yes sir, I know you have rights."
                      "In fact, I know your rights better than you do!"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by cajunguy View Post
                        "The victim’s sister refuted the policeman’s claim, citing witnesses who said that Ortiz was trying to beat the red light and was driving fast."

                        Ah, well, now that makes it a lot easier. After all, the "victim's" sister wouldn't lie - would she?

                        And since the sister got all the information and did the investigation, done deal.

                        Investigation finished. Cop is guilty.
                        Next case!


                        (Ummm, was that the answer you were looking for?)


                        .
                        It is an incompetent answer. You want to try again with objectivity?
                        Last edited by cmr164; 08-10-2008, 07:25 PM. Reason: misplaced text

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by L-1 View Post
                          Sorry, but I smell a set up on this one. You don't hand a fatal accident investigation off to a single officer at random, let alone a fatal involving a government official where allegations of misconduct have been made. Instead, it goes to a multi discipline accident investigation unit or a fatal accident investigation unit that has the expertise to analyze all the data, evidence and statements and sift through the BS to come to a reasonable conclusion as to what really happened . Even small agencies that lack this resource have the wisdom to ask for help from a bigger one that does, and have them conduct the investigation for them.

                          The Philippines may be a third world country, but somewhere in their police hierarchy there has to be someone with the expertise to properly handle such an investigation. I don't think anyone here is going to buy into your "handing this investigation off to a random cop" scenario, for an event this significant where public trust is on the line.
                          This is the only answer the original post deserves. Excellent post again, L-1.
                          For every one hundred men you send us,
                          Ten should not even be here.
                          Eighty are nothing but targets.
                          Nine of them are real fighters;
                          We are lucky to have them, they the battle make.
                          Ah, but the one. One of them is a warrior.
                          And he will bring the others back.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by L-1 View Post
                            Sorry, but I smell a set up on this one. You don't hand a fatal accident investigation off to a single officer at random, let alone a fatal involving a government official where allegations of misconduct have been made. Instead, it goes to a multi discipline accident investigation unit or a fatal accident investigation unit that has the expertise to analyze all the data, evidence and statements and sift through the BS to come to a reasonable conclusion as to what really happened . Even small agencies that lack this resource have the wisdom to ask for help from a bigger one that does, and have them conduct the investigation for them.
                            This is a valid answer and does demonstrate professionalism, but it is still not a direct answer for one to essentially say, 'Those other guys will handle it'. End of the day... you get put in charge. What do you do and how do you proceed?

                            The Philippines may be a third world country, but somewhere in their police hierarchy there has to be someone with the expertise to properly handle such an investigation. I don't think anyone here is going to buy into your "handing this investigation off to a random cop" scenario, for an event this significant where public trust is on the line.
                            As part of the anti-corruption effort here, I can tell you with with great sadness that things are worse here than you think. Much worse.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by cmr164 View Post
                              It is an incompetent answer. You want to try again with objectivity?

                              Incompetent questions breed incompetent answers.


                              Did I miss somewhere that you were anointed to "teach" us your version of objectivity? I mean, isn't your blanket statement that we're not objective subjective in itself?
                              “We don't disagree, you are wrong. Until you have a clue what you are talking about we can't disagree.” - cgh6366

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 3262 users online. 174 members and 3088 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 26,947 at 08:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X