Excessive Force Against The Police?

I understand the the chief has been less than honest while testifying in hearings concerning officer discipline before. Is it possible for the FOP to file a complaint on behalf of an officer(s) against the chief for dishonesty and conduct unbecoming?? May be futile but certainly would expose him for what he really is.

Now why would the fop choose to print this story? Could it be that one of their favorite sons has been hit with this charge himself? Hmmmm

The Chief is right - we do have a problem with Officers not following department policy and the law. This especially applies in the case of favoritism. Officers should not be allowing high ranking officials of the Administration, their friends, family members to break the law without enforcing it as they would enforce it with regular citizens. Every Officer should watch for any deviations from policy and the law and make every effort to make sure the Courts and the public get the evidence. Nothing beats videotape evidence either. THANK YOU FOR REMINDING YOUR OFFICERS OF THEIR DUTY TO ENFORCE THE LAW, CHIEF WHITE.

So your saying if I worked in a resturaunt and happen to see a high ranking police official drinking 3 or 4 beers with his dinner and then go out and drive a unmarked police car, as a citizen I would be given higher credibility on the complaint? Hmmm.... makes you wonder who came up with that logic.

uh...not to be the devil's advocate here, but...that article is a BAD example, if you're wanting to prove the officers are being unfairly judged against. I can say for a fact that the officer in question DOES 'talk nasty' to females he encounters on the street. He has, on more than one occasion, let an attractive, young female go, even making prospective felony narcotic charges go after flirting with her.

I'm sure there are a lot of other officers who have worked with him that can back this up. I definitely am not in favor of taking any scumbag criminal's word over a police officer concerning a complaint, but if the officer's behavior IS wrong and malicious, then so be it.

My point is, there are better examples to show.

I also worked with this officer and never saw anything that would resemble that type of behavior. He is a pretty decent guy. But there are several other examples of the chief doing this wrongly.

So with all that being said and obviously a problem, what is going to be done about it??? Not being sarcastic or trying to disrespect anyone just wondering what can or will be done to solve the crooked police chief problem.

It appears that there is a different standard of truthfulness for officers and 4th Division sergeants.

The Chief is an appointed politician and politicians have double-standards and generally don't know how to do their job as well as they know how to stay in office. All of the Majors are non-merit appointees too. Don't expect fairness or even competence from them. If this City were serious about having a professional police department, they would restore some legitimacy to our corrupted civil service process and would use it to select our department's leaders instead of reserving those spots for the politically-connected. Just one more reason for Louisville to have a backwater image like the rest of this state does.

The issue here is not whether the officer in question or others are favorites of the fop executive board or anything else. It is whether a charge of untruthfulness can be substansiated with out proof. Short of an audio recording, it would be hard to prove untruthfulness in this case. There are other cases where untruthfulness might be proven with records such as court subpenioas or time stamps or log in times on department computers. But the department can not prove with out a doubt that the officer was untruthfu. And once the department uses it on one officer, they will use it on anyone.

Imagine that your major is a racist. He has made statements about the chief and jokes about an african american council person. He will not place black officers into the flex unit or the traffic car. He has made all sorts of comments in front of you, but you know none of the other officers present when he made these remarks will back you up. So do you speak up, or do you lay down because you fear a charge of untruthfulness if you speak up? An exteme case, but it has happened under the current administration.

Suppose your district commander has it in for one of your fellow officers. He or she makes a number of comments about how they are going to get the officer, no matter what. When you go forward, its your word against the majors. The chief will take the majors side, unless you have an audio recording. Witnesses aren't good enough. Now you are being investigated for unthuthfulness. Think that it won't happen? Think again because it already has.

Once you catch an untruthfulness charge, you can never testify again. Every time you get on the stand the defense can bring up that you have been punished for lying under oath. Want to be an instructor? Forget it. Instructors have to be able to testify in court about what they teach. Will the department let an officer who is impeachable be an instructor? Will that officer be able to retire and take a job with the state as an instructor? Don't think so.

Florida passed a law that states any officer with a substained charge of untruthfulness can no longer be a police officer. They made it retroactive. A number of officers lost their jobs. When chiefs can't get rid of officers they don't like, say the FOP or PBA president, they get IA to do an investigation and viola, they are found guilty of untruthfulness and they are gone. Think it can't happen? It all ready has.

Robert White has always wanted the ability to transfer officers where and when he wants. He has always wanted to be able to punish officers with out regard to due process and the Police Officers Bill of Rights. Robert White is using the charge of untruthfulness to get around the contract and bill of rights. Whether you think this officer is guilty of misconduct or not, it is impossible to prove untruthfulness in this case. The charge of untruthfulness is another Bob White "crock 'o crap." Good ole' Bob wants to hurt officers and keep hurting them long after he is gone. He should remember that what goes around comes around. He has a tendency to be a little less truthful than he should be. Wouldn't it be funny if a Metro Council member took exception to being lied to by Bob about crime stats or staffing levels and filed a complaint against him? With elections coming up, what better way to make political hay and embarrass the Mayor. And if the mayor gets embarrassed, its bye bye Bobbie!! No, better to let Bob White stay and the crime rate to keep going up, up, up.

This City is becoming a corrupt, crime-ridden craphole just like Washington DC and pre-Giuliani NYC. Jerry is the white David Dinkins of Louisville. We're getting all of the problems of the big cities without any of the beneits thanks to Bob and Jerry still having outdated and disproven ideas on how to run a City. If the FOP doesn't take a more active role in the elections and help get rid of Abramson, then I question why we have an FOP.

As it is for everything else...If you know the boss you are in good. Just for example, there was a LT. who failed to get her vehicle (from a rentle company) serviced for a very long time. This LT. also failed to report damage on the vehilce from a possible accident. The LT knows the SOP as it is the LTs job to enforce / investigate violations of such. When questions were brought up by the Capt. of the unit she failed to tell the truth on it. The LT got a couple of days for not having the truck serviced but there was not enought evidence to for the untruthfullness (even with a Capt's testimony). OH, this LT bowls with the Chief..........Not what you do, but who you know.......all this is rumor......yah right......

There is a rumor that the fourth distr...I mean division Sgt. that was caught lying is going to be transfered to Internal Affairs. That's just what we need.

We are off topic here guys. Were talking about lieing period. I for 1 have found out if things go wrong FESS UP DON'T COVER UP. I would rather fight the administration for telling the truth in a matter than be caught in a LIE. (Which if you forget is a FIREABLE offense in itself.) I probably am one of the less loved by the administration on this dept but have been able to keep myself out of trouble by not lieing about something I'm asked about in a investigation. JUST TELL THE TRUTH, because they usually have the correct answer anyway. Remember the one's doing the investigation are INVESTIGATOR's just like the one's in homicide, robbery etc, and they will do their job. Now you might think I'm pro administration for saying these things, but if you know who I am, you know I'm not. I'm not afraid to criticize someone for dumb things done from the Chief, down to the officer on the beat.

Wake up guys and gals! You work for a Chief who learned his trade in the Washington DC Metro Police under Marion Barry. Don't expect him to be fair or to put honest people in PSU and IA. Just be glad he isn't smoking a crackpipe after work.