Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Objectivity

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • cajunguy
    replied
    Originally posted by nuthead View Post
    Incompetent questions breed incompetent answers.
    Actually it was a smart*** answer, not necessarily incompetant.

    With over thirty years experience under my belt in many areas of LE (including Investigations), I tend to be pretty objective.

    Most of the time, anyway.

    Y'all have a nice week, ya hear?


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • nuthead
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • cmr164
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • (S)Sgt Elmer
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • cmr164
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • cajunguy
    replied
    "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?)


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • L-1
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • cmr164
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • cmr164
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • pulicords
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • PB3021
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Narco
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • cmr164
    replied
    "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?

    Leave a comment:


  • Smurfette_76
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • FireCop86
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 5080 users online. 322 members and 4758 guests.

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

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X