Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly..... | Page 223 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly.....

Who was in the wrong?

  • Cop

    Votes: 23 21.1%

  • Dude who got shot

    Votes: 31 28.4%

  • I like turtles

    Votes: 55 50.5%
  • Total voters
    109
Rob MacLennan said:
It's the unions job to defend their members. If they don't, then why pay dues at all?

Once a conviction is registered, the union is free to step back.
Click to expand...
It should be the unions job to defend their members against unreasonable persecution, not to blindly defend them no matter what the evidence show they have done. Even if it is their job to defend the members, punting it a few years in the future on every case is stupid amd unsustainable. Hearing now, criminal case later. What other job requires a criminal conviction prior to considering termination?
 
GreyGhost said:
It should be the unions job to defend their members against unreasonable persecution, not to blindly defend them no matter what the evidence show they have done. Even if it is their job to defend the members, punting it a few years in the future on every case is stupid amd unsustainable. Hearing now, criminal case later. What other job requires a criminal conviction prior to considering termination?
Click to expand...
everyone's deemed innocent until proven otherwise.

yes i realize in the real world simply getting arrested could be grounds for termination in many fields.
 
Evoex said:
everyone's deemed innocent until proven otherwise.

yes i realize in the real world simply getting arrested could be grounds for termination in many fields.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying no hearing. I am saying the bar for termination should be well below the bar for criminal conviction. Have the hearing. Present the evidence. Present the defence. Then rule on employment implications. The criminal trial should be an entirely separate process completely unrelated to employment.
 
GreyGhost said:
I'm not saying no hearing. I am saying the bar for termination should be well below the bar for criminal conviction. Have the hearing. Present the evidence. Present the defence. Then rule on employment implications. The criminal trial should be an entirely separate process completely unrelated to employment.
Click to expand...
So..

  1. Hearing
  2. Fired
  3. Found not guilty/case thrown out
  4. Job???!!
 
Evoex said:
So..

  1. Hearing
  2. Fired
  3. Found not guilty/case thrown out
  4. Job???!!
Click to expand...
No. I am saying criminal trial and hearing are entirely separate. The bar for being fired should be much lower than beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal trial.

1. Hearing
2. Fired.
3.criminal trial
4.jail or apply for jobs. Try not to do something that gets you fired this time.
 
The results of a hearing could influence the results of a trial, if it's done first.

Whereas, the results of a trial are expected to influence the results of a hearing.
 
Hack said:
Then theres this little thing called "double jeopardy"...
Click to expand...
Double jeopardy is a criminal term. Has nothing to do with whether you are fired. The guy who pushed Ujiri wouldn't have a job but for the fact that he is a cop. If he was just a security guard the guy would have been fired....no crime needed. Here's the door thank you very much. Cops shouldn't be any different.
 
800over said:
Double jeopardy is a criminal term. Has nothing to do with whether you are fired. The guy who pushed Ujiri wouldn't have a job but for the fact that he is a cop. If he was just a security guard the guy would have been fired....no crime needed. Here's the door thank you very much. Cops shouldn't be any different.
Click to expand...


Well... let's fire everybody then without due process.

Seen it before...
Guys cleared in court... Then agency goes after them.
As if your retarded witch hunt process trumps a court of law.
 
People beat a case in court all the time, that doesn’t mean they didn’t commit a crime it just means the prosecution couldn’t get a conviction. As an employer if I have reasonable evidence the employee is gone. The courts can decide what to do with them on the societal level.


Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
 
SVeezy said:
People beat a case in court all the time, that doesn’t mean they didn’t commit a crime it just means the prosecution couldn’t get a conviction. As an employer if I have reasonable evidence the employee is gone. The courts can decide what to do with them on the societal level.


Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Click to expand...
People are wrongly convicted all the time as well.

What 'evidence' are you referring to?

Guy gets arrested in work place in front of his peers, as an owner/boss what would your reaction be?
 
SVeezy said:
People beat a case in court all the time, that doesn’t mean they didn’t commit a crime it just means the prosecution couldn’t get a conviction. As an employer if I have reasonable evidence the employee is gone. The courts can decide what to do with them on the societal level.


Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Click to expand...

Do you employ people who have a strong union, that's willing to financially back possible years of wrongful dismissal litigation? Because cops do. A criminal conviction means that's not going to happen.
 
Hack said:
Well... let's fire everybody then without due process.

Seen it before...
Guys cleared in court... Then agency goes after them.
As if your retarded witch hunt process trumps a court of law.
Click to expand...
I actually got dumber reading this.
Never said no due process....
i'll type slowly for you. ARE you saying the only way a police officer(or anyone for that matter) should be fired is if he/she has committed AND found guilty of a crime? If yes....then you are a in fact "retarded". Where does it say the only "Due process" is a criminal conviction? I didn't say there should be no due process......in the case of the Ujiri incident. Cop assaulted Ujiri.....twice....then lied about it. Are you saying that we need more than that? What agency are you talking about? What witch hunt are you talking about. If i see my employee push one of the people they are hired to protect......AND he lies about it: The due process is you are fired.
 
800over said:
I actually got dumber reading this.
Never said no due process....
i'll type slowly for you. ARE you saying the only way a police officer(or anyone for that matter) should be fired is if he/she has committed AND found guilty of a crime? If yes....then you are a in fact "retarded". Where does it say the only "Due process" is a criminal conviction? I didn't say there should be no due process......in the case of the Ujiri incident. Cop assaulted Ujiri.....twice....then lied about it. Are you saying that we need more than that? What agency are you talking about? What witch hunt are you talking about. If i see my employee push one of the people they are hired to protect......AND he lies about it: The due process is you are fired.
Click to expand...
Well, in that particular case, apparently the Deputy sheriffs boss watched the body cam video and then issued a statement that they stand by their deputy. If police departments want to stick with the story of only a few bad apples, when something goes wrong, they cannot blindly support the liar. By watching that video and then ignoring the contents and backing the officer, I think there needs to be a further purge of that department.
 
Evoex said:
People are wrongly convicted all the time as well.

What 'evidence' are you referring to?

Guy gets arrested in work place in front of his peers, as an owner/boss what would your reaction be?
Click to expand...

I was intentionally being very general.

Yes people get wrongly convicted all the time as well.

What I would do depends on the specific circumstances.

My point was, no position should be protected and paid until the courts decide. If an employee’s actions dictate dismissal or otherwise that is a decision that generally shouldn’t hang on what a court case decides. Unless that court case is specifically pertaining to their employment.


Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app
 
SVeezy said:
I was intentionally being very general.

Yes people get wrongly convicted all the time as well.

What I would do depends on the specific circumstances.

My point was, no position should be protected and paid until the courts decide. If an employee’s actions dictate dismissal or otherwise that is a decision that generally shouldn’t hang on what a court case decides. Unless that court case is specifically pertaining to their employment.


Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com mobile app
Click to expand...
Fair
 
800over said:
i'll type slowly for you. ARE you saying the only way a police officer(or anyone for that matter) should be fired is if he/she has committed AND found guilty of a crime?
Click to expand...


I thought that's what's being discussed... If I'm charged with assault (as an officer) and the the courts find me not guilty... There's where it should end.





800over said:
you are a in fact "retarded".
Click to expand...

'Blame it on my 30 years experience watching guys get railroaded by their employers AFTER being cleared in court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom