Search Results for: node/SSCC children police

SSCC #186, #187 – Chicago PD

By | | , ,
Comments Off on SSCC #186, #187 – Chicago PD

A bistate crackdown on the Latin Kings street gang on Friday snared two
Chicago Police officers accused of using their badges to rob people in
Northwest Indiana and Illinois.

Imagine that, officers of the law acting to the detriment of society to support their gang.  While these individuals were caught this is being included in the count because in Chicago, the city where they concealed carry is prevented, obtaining a firearm is overly difficult, and overall the leadership believes that one should rely on the police department for assistance.

State Sponsored Criminal Count:

186: Alex Guerrero

187: Antonio Martinez

Because if you live in Chicago instead of calling the police when you’re being mugged, the police just show up and mug you instead.

h/t Dave Hardy.

SSCC #388–Seattle

By | | ,
Comments Off on SSCC #388–Seattle

We all know how hard the Seattle Police department works to get their employees eligible for the count.  Today we get a rare behind the scenes look at how they grow the outstanding police officers that are a shining example that others should inspire themselves to.  (If you didn’t have a clue, that whole last sentence was sarcastic!)

A Seattle police officer caught on video kicking a handcuffed suspect in the head has been suspended for 10-days, but he won’t have to serve the suspension as long as he stays out of trouble.

Some how he escaped the wrath of the legal system, though an internal investigation did reveal the use of excessive force.  His punishment a 10 day suspension with this note:

…Seattle police chief John Diaz ruled that Haynes will not be required to serve the unpaid suspension as long as he stays out of trouble for two years.

How nice.  So that’s out they have groomed so many fine upstanding officers.

State Sponsored Criminal #388: Garth Haynes

Because you know that you only need the threaten punishment when it comes to officers of the law.  Following through does absolutely nothing to drive home the point that what they did is wrong.  Heaven forbid you use the misfit to set an example of.

SSCC #193 – Campbell

By | | , ,
Comments Off on SSCC #193 – Campbell

This is a first of the 4 legged variety.

An off-duty Campbell police officer was walking Storm and allowed the dog to go to the bathroom in a fenced-in area. But the dog saw the boy and ran after him, apparently mistaking a running boy for a suspect.

Remember though, had it been your or my dog, there would be a very strong and justified push to put down the dog as a dangerous animal.  There is no justification for attacking a 8 year old boy who was playing.  Why was the dog not trained to follow verbal commands.  The dog should not have attacked anyone without being instructed to do so.  At a minimum why in the name of Sam Hell was that dog anywhere off of a leash if that is it’s behavioral model.  It’s not as if the dog was defending it’s property or owner from a direct threat.  The property wasn’t even the owners.

“Anything running, they’re trained … could be a potential threat. And all he’s doing is reacting and doing what he was trained to do,” Rusnak told WFMJ.

Wait, your department did what!?  You trained your dogs to go after potential threats.  Who thought that it would be necessary to have a dog attack potential threats.  Where I’m from, your dog attacks my kid, if you don’t take it out to the woods and do it, I will.  Police dog or not, attacking a child, unprovoked, is completely unacceptable and shows severe training issues with the dog as well as handling issues with the officer responsible for the dog.

In this instance I’m going to blame the officer attempting to justify it since I am unsure of the name of the handler.

State Sponsored Criminal Count 193: Sgt. John Rusnak

Because a police dog is different than your dog because the state views him as a police officer.  So when he runs off and attacks and innocent child, that’s just like a cop shooting a boy hiding in a shed.

SSCC #262–Spokane

By | | , ,
Comments Off on SSCC #262–Spokane

Warning:

Image courtesy of Robb Allen found via JayG

A Spokane police officer fired in 2009 after driving drunk while off duty, hitting a pickup with his truck and leaving the scene of the collision is likely to be rehired and get more than two years of back pay.

Wait, he did what and this is acceptable for a police officer.  Why would they do such a thing?

Bob Dunn, Thoma’s attorney, said Thoma had a disability – alcoholism – that resulted from stress from his job. He argued that the police department knew Thoma struggled with alcoholism and didn’t try to get him help. Thoma filed a complaint about his firing with the Washington State Human Rights Commission soon after he was terminated.

So how much do taxpayers get to pay this criminal?

Thoma also would be paid about $275,000 for back pay and benefits, and the city will pay his attorney $15,000. The back pay is based on the amount he earned as a sergeant.

So isn’t that nice.  Remember if you’re going to commit a crime, become a cop first.  This by the way is the prime definition of a state sponsored criminal count.

State Sponsored Criminal Cop #262: Sergeant Brad Thoma

Because when you commit a DUI and a hit and run and you’re a police officer, just blame it on alcoholism that way you’re disabled.

SSCC #346–Decatur

By | | , ,
Comments Off on SSCC #346–Decatur

Decatur’s police chief said allegations of wrongdoing against two officers who fired as many as 13 shots during the Jan. 1 shooting and killing of a dog at Danville Park Apartments were “not sustained,” but the officers violated department policy by not activating their microphones.

So what, they couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn, is that really surprising for law enforcement?  No, but this isn’t acceptable, especially given the fear was over a dog.

Some residents of the apartment complex complained that the shooting, which sent at least one bullet through an apartment door, was unnecessary and put residents in danger.

“I think this is appalling, seeing what I saw firsthand as a direct witness,” said Patti Meadows, who said she called police Internal Affairs to complain following the incident. “They put others’ lives in danger. This was not an environment to pull guns out.”

Meadows said she was standing near the officers on an upstairs walkway when they opened fire. The boxer dog wasn’t being aggressive, she said.

Another witness, Hailey Brown, told The Daily she offered to put the dog back inside the apartment after officers opened the door and let it out.

Some time’s you have to quote a chunk to illustrate the whole problem.  Note the officers opened the door that let the dog out.  The owner offered to take the dog and lock it up, instead they fire 13 shots into an apartment complex with innocent bystanders  around.  While in a good shoot, officers are often protected from the danger of a shoot through, this would be a hard justification.  This story from Uncle today shows what should happen before officers discharge their weapons.

The deputy, a 23-year veteran of the department and 5-year police dog handler, took Gunner to the vet to explore “options available to curb his aggression,” police said. But while the deputy and the veterinarian were trying to attach a leash to the dog, Gunner leaped in a biting lunge toward the deputy’s face, and he blocked the dog with his forearm, the release said.

That was an aggressive dog that needed killing.  A dog looking at you does not equal aggression, though many officers seem to feel that is the case.  Unless it is obviously trying to bite you, suck it up there chief.  Even more than that, let the barn latch on your arm so it won’t take 13 bullets to hit it in a friendly rich environment.

I will say they at least scored a 38% hit rate, however that makes me believe the dog wasn’t as mobile or aggressive as they claim.  However this right here was the icing on the cake:

Taylor said he consulted District Attorney Scott Anderson, but they were both of the opinion that shooting into a residence was not a crime if there was no criminal intent.

Wonder if they would say the same thing if it wasn’t officer friendly shooting through a dog, but instead a non-anointed citizen shooting through Cujo.  We constantly hear about how we’re accountable for every bullet, and I’ve had conversations with friends whom I respect quite well and the above actually appears that it would hold true.  However they would put it to a jury to decide, doubly if you were dealing with a local choir boy where you passed the initial interview.

State Sponsored Criminal #346: John Doe

Because when you’re bummed you’re on duty on New Years, shoot someone’s dog to liven it up.  Leave your mics off then it’s your word against everyone else’s, don’t worry about safety though because there’s no criminal intent right!?

h/t The Agitator

SSCC #386 – Opa-locka

By | | , ,
Comments Off on SSCC #386 – Opa-locka

A suspended Florida police officer—who’s been fired six times over the years for alleged misconduct, only to be reinstated—says he’s the victim of a “witch hunt” and wants to go back to work, even though he’s being paid $60,000 a year to stay home.

At least they have sent his ass home, but $60k a year still?  Not to mention that under the statement, “once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three or more times is enemy action,” what is six incidents?

Who knows maybe they were incidents that in the grand scheme aren’t actually that bad…

Bosque—who has been accused of “cracking the head of a handcuffed suspect, beating juveniles, hiding drugs in his police car, stealing from suspects, defying direct orders and lying and falsifying police reports”—was suspended with pay in May after he allowed a newspaper reporter to ride along in his patrol car without permission. (During the ride-along, Bosque told the reporter, “I’m an excellent police officer, but I break the rules.”)

He admits to breaking the rules, yet he continues to be paid for nothing and wants his job back.  This is why many people are loosing their faith in law enforcement professionals.  While not all are like this individual, their willingness to not expel him from their ranks taints them all.

State Sponsored Criminal #386: German Bosque

Because rules are for the little guy.  Why? Because if you want to make an omelette you’re gonna need to break a few eggs.

SSCC Honorable Mention–Seattle PD 01/05/2012

By | | , ,
Comments Off on SSCC Honorable Mention–Seattle PD 01/05/2012

Seriously with the way Seattle PD and the Seattle City Attorney are behaving when crap like this happens I’m both happy and pissed off.

After more than a year of bruising news, the Seattle Police Department found itself reeling Thursday after a veteran officer died from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound hours after being arrested in an undercover drug sting.

So I’m happy that a corrupt officer has finally been held accountable, doubly so he did it to himself with the barrel of his own gun saving the public the costs of prosecuting him.  Now why would I be pissed off I hear you ask, well that’s simple.

“This is a tremendous tragedy,” Deputy Chief Nick Metz said at a somber news conference Thursday evening at police headquarters.

Know what a tragedy is Chief Metz?  The abuses your department is delivering to the law abiding public, the behavior of your police officers, and the all out corruption displayed by your department.  Then again maybe I’m jumping to conclusions, maybe he was innocent and just caught in the cross fire.

On Wednesday, as part of a so-called “integrity test,” an undercover officer from another agency working in the Rainier Valley approached Nelson and gave him a purse that contained cocaine, Metz said.

Unknown to Nelson, he was under surveillance by detectives watching to see if he booked the cocaine into evidence.

“He did not do that,” Metz said.

The officer was followed in his car after work and stopped by police just outside the city limits.

“There was a search, and we found a quantity of the narcotics,” Metz said.

Well there went the caught in the crossfire theory.  There is a time to stand up and say, “We Fucked Up! Here’s what we did wrong, this is how we’re fixing it.”  This department lacks the ability to air its dirty laundry and continues to act as if for some reason it is exempt from the rules of lawful behavior.  It appears that Deputy Chief Metz is just considering this a tragedy because the guy got caught and then committed suicide propelling the incident to the front page. 

State Sponsored Criminal Count HM: Deputy Chief Nick Metz

Because it’s a tragedy when one of our officers gets caught, doubly so when he does something to cause it to end up in the news.

via Joe

A Note for CSGV, Here’s What PSH Gets the Public (SSCC #336)

By | | , , ,
Comments Off on A Note for CSGV, Here’s What PSH Gets the Public (SSCC #336)

Someone on their way to work induced someone in the greater Boston area to go into a fit of PSH recently.

What people inside didn’t know–Brockton police had just received a
911 call–reporting a man with a gun walking toward the store.

911 caller: “And he’s got a gun in his back pocket, so I don’t know what’s up with that.”

911 Operator: What’s he look like?

Caller: He’s black, he has a red shirt on, and like tan pants.

So we have someone turning their pants brown on account of someone walking towards a store with a “gun” in their pocket.  So what happens to the store employees that don’t actually match the description?

Watch: the man police confront in the red shirt and black pants is Bill Ceneus, a 10 year employee of Save-a-lot.

You can see one officer wraps his arms around Ceneus, lifts him up, and within seconds, he’s on the floor.

Ceneus
is handcuffed and searched by three officers. No weapon is found…

Well I guess it’s a good thing the officers didn’t just shoot him.  But it begs the question, where’s the guy with the tan pants, since you know the officer is obviously color blind.

So
where’s the guy the 911 caller saw with a gun? While Ceneus sits in
handcuffs, another store camera shows police confronting a different
store employee–wearing a red shirt and tan pants. He’s in the produce
section –and as he shows them, he has a pricing gun. The police report
says that’s what “was mistaken for a firearm.”

Lets see here, the caller induced himself into a rage of PSH over what he thought was a gun.  The end result, one man physically assaulted and another detained and harassed.  The result of the physical assault is now a lawsuit whereby the taxpayers are going to pay out*.

The public at large, especially those who go into PSH over the sight of a firearm are not able to accurately separate real firearms from fake.  Take this (the call was for a man with an AK-47 mind you), this and this for other examples.  There are numerous other examples but those drive the point home.

There is a cure to the cause of PSH though.

State Sponsored Criminal #336: John Doe

*I am including this in the criminal count.  It was an unnecessary assault based on the ramblings of a panicking individual which the officer couldn’t be bothered to see he didn’t match the description or the fact red was a store uniform.  Doubly so since the report differs from witness statements and video as to their justification for force.