Worthless officer needs a blanket party

[Retired96]

Makes me sick hearing the conduct of this worthless officer.
http://fox8.com/2018/02/27/i-team-ex...-with-suspect/

[Curt5811]

The new breed.

[CCCSD]

Must be nice to have such dedicated cops like that.

Hope he gets a party...

[GangGreen712]

He should get fired, but I'm sure the city sees him as one less future lawsuit, and will want others to follow his example. He'll probably get a gig at the police academy teaching some course about how to stay out of trouble and brag to the recruits that "In my [number] years in law enforcement, I've never had a complaint against me, and I'm the only officer on the force who's never been sued!"

[reils49]

Or he will become a boss and have that mentality.

[nobodyjr]

But he's not wrong about how much blue team sucks....

[RGDS]

Ain’t that the truth.

[ateamer]

Find a sergeant who, somewhere in the officer's career - maybe at a training day, roll call or even in the locker room - told him that if a fellow officer is in a fight, you back him up. Document that he heard those words from a higher-ranking officer and then terminate him for insubordination.

[reils49]

And this is the downside of police unions.

[m.p.c]

He'll be a Chief someday, mark my words

[nobodyjr]

And this is the downside of police unions.

I'm part of a union and was appalled at their unions response. It's ridiculous. They have to represent him in a disciplinary action, but they should not have commented in that manner before an investigation is completed.

[Pogue Mahone]

He'll be a Chief someday, mark my words

[nobodyjr]

It's embarrassing that guy came from home.

[Pogue Mahone]

SDPD or SPD?

[HI629]

He kind of looks like a [email protected]$$ we’re working on getting out right now!

[Curt5811]

And this is the downside of police unions.

The downside? I'm not seeing it.

The union has a role to play. They have to side with the officer, whether they personally think he acted properly or not. He is still entitled to representation, and to have them make sure all of his employment rights are observed.

I'm a union director and was appalled at their unions response. It's ridiculous. They have to represent him in a disciplinary action, but they should not have commented in that manner before an investigation is completed.

"Cleveland Police Union President Jeff Follmer said, “No excuses. Lessons learned. He realizes he made some mistakes.”

I'm not seeing a reason to be appalled. They basically admitted his conduct wasn't acceptable.

They did need to comment. The rest of the troops needed to hear the union say it will support and defend each of them equally and with enthusiasm.

Trust me... I get frustrated when my union successfully defends some chronic moron who 's got a stack of IA files in his name. If the bosses would do their job correctly, and follow progressive discipline rules, we wouldn't have to work with these knobs. I don't blame the union for defending guys like this. I blame the agency for not using the tools it has to get rid of a problem child... the right way.

[nobodyjr]

The downside? I'm not seeing it.

The union has a role to play. They have to side with the officer, whether they personally think he acted properly or not. He is still entitled to representation, and to have them make sure all of his employment rights are observed.



"Cleveland Police Union President Jeff Follmer said, “No excuses. Lessons learned. He realizes he made some mistakes.”

I'm not seeing a reason to be appalled. They basically admitted his conduct wasn't acceptable.

They did need to comment. The rest of the troops needed to hear the union say it will support and defend each of them equally and with enthusiasm.

Trust me... I get frustrated when my union successfully defends some chronic moron who 's got a stack of IA files in his name. If the bosses would do their job correctly, and follow progressive discipline rules, we wouldn't have to work with these knobs. I don't blame the union for defending guys like this. I blame the agency for not using the tools it has to get rid of a problem child... the right way.

Because it's more than making mistakes. This is not a mistake. It's a conscious decision to endanger other officers, blow off his duty, and to embarrass every other officer there. He deserves representation for the disciplinary action, but he does not deserve a public defense. the union minimized his actions, which throws shade on every other cop out there. In public the union represents every member. Some people don't belong being cops. To defend him publicly is to throw down the other cops he burned. You represent everyone here.

[Curt5811]

Because it's more than making mistakes. This is not a mistake. It's a conscious decision to endanger other officers, blow off his duty, and to embarrass every other officer there. He deserves representation for the disciplinary action, but he does not deserve a public defense. the union minimized his actions, which throws shade on every other cop out there. In public the union represents every member. Some people don't belong being cops. To defend him publicly is to throw down the other cops he burned. You represent everyone here.

I understand your frustration, but I can't agree. The union has to defend him. That's their purpose. As was pointed out, the investigation is still ongoing. Of course they're going to minimize.

Did he just one day decide to not do his job? I think there is a long history that hasn't been disclosed yet. I fully agree that some people just don't belong being cops. I lay that squarely at the feet of Administration and the Academy. How did his attitude not get discovered during hiring? Most officers serve a year's probation and FTO during which firing is a piece of cake. How many extra chances has this clown gotten in the past? There are multiple layers that are supposed to weed out ******bags like this one. How many actually get weeded out? Admin failed you, not the union.

We had a female it took ten years to fire. Admin had foot-high stacks of documentation of her near-continuous screwing up and open refusal to follow SOP. When she was sent to Patrol, she was given three different FTOs. I had to provide remedial training, and wrote that she was literally untrainable. She just wouldn't do what she was told. One month, she was sent as the closest squad to two separate serious injury crashes, yet never showed up at either scene. They had CAD GPS mapping records of her driving in circles instead of responding. Her supervisors gave this stubborn cow 50 (fifty, and in 5-0) employee activity documentation write-ups for incompetence. The supervisors kept giving her warnings and second chances. Over and over and over. They never bothered to take it to the next steps... because that would've meant doing a real IA write-up.

[RGDS]

Well, as I have been told “the union defends the process not the person” if you eff up... bye bye.

All this said, never lose sight of the already stated fact: the employing agency sees this person as a minimal liability.

what they forget is... while this person may not cause a civil rights lawsuit, he will cause an industrial disability and may even get someone killed. Death=lawsuits. They should fire him. I would rather deal with a partner who panics than deal with a coward.

[Aerohead]

He'll be a Chief someday, mark my words

Probably fast-tracked.