Recently in Police Officers Category

"April 15, 2010

Next week the U.S. Supreme Court takes up a question near and dear to digitally proficient texters: whether their personal messages are private when transmitted over an electronic device supplied by an employer."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125998549

     Most of us understand that when your employer gives you something to use, its still theirs, and a certain level of "acceptable behavior" comes with the privilege of using said allowance.  HOWEVER, we have all heard about people downloading explicit material at work, engaging in illicit chat room conversations on company laptops, and making long-distance phone calls to your family in Japan on the company's dime.  

     With this context in mind, the article linked above describes a situation involving cellular phones distributed to police officers in Ontario, California.  When the phones were distributed to police officers, the lieutenant responsible for the equipment informed the users that the message content was private, and officers would be required to pay out of pocket for messages exceeding the 25,000 character limit per month.  

     A problem arose however, when officers DID exceed the limit, and the lieutenant described feeling like a "bill collector".  He grew weary of this responsibility, and when he requested transcripts of the message content being transmitted by his officers, he was surprised to find explicit language being used between one particular officer, his estranged ex-wife, and another police officer.  

     I circle back now to my first point.  Most of us understand that this kind of behavior is not acceptable on company time, and especially with company money.  However, the officer and others who allegedly sent the "sexy" text messages sued the department for breaking their privacy rights.  

     If this situation only involved police issued equipment, then I'd probably side with the department on this one.  HOWEVER it doesn't, as the estranged ex-wife DOES NOT use a department issued phone.  What about her privacy rights?  

     George Washington University professor Orin Kerr provides the following insight: 

"Does the government violate your rights when they take those messages off the server, even though you're not the government employee?" asks George Washington University law professor Orin Kerr. "And what does that mean for the rest of us, who do have privacy rights, when the government wants to get copies of those communications?"

     If this were an isolated case without possible influence on the rest of the country, that would be fine.  However this same kind of situation will inevitably continue to arise with other agencies, organizations, private companies and the like.  What is reasonable privacy?  What sort of protections can citizens and employees expect regarding their personal lives?  What will prevent the government or others from getting into your "dirty little secrets"?  

     I submit the following guidelines:  WATCH YOUR BACK JACK.  Its sort of like the advice you get from an old sage like your grandparents, "If you can't say something nice, don't say nothin' at all".  Obviously the issue only came to trial because of the DISCRETION used by police administrators to view transcripts of transmitted messages.  

Discretion, its all around us! 

http://www.straypetadvocacy.org/html/cruelty_laws.html

This is a website that is all about being an advocate for animals. There are now 41 states plus the District of Columbia that have felony charges for people who abuse animals. This website talks about the Animal Welfare Act, which is the federal law that provides regulations for shelters, pounds and places that recover stolen animals. It also shows each state and what their charges are for people who abuse and neglect their animals. There are also other places you can go to on this website that talk about de-clawing and the laws with that, as well as sterilization and shelter laws.

There are also a lot of shows on tv that deal with animal cruelty. One particular show is Animal Cops on Animal Planet. They rescue animals that have been abused or neglected and take them to the vet or to the pound where they can be adopted. The cops then arrest the people who abused the animals and give them proper punishment they deserve.

Hope Steffey called the police as a victim of assault and endured even more when the police took her into custody.  It all started when Steffey's cousin called the police over Hope being assaulted, when the police arrived and asked for her license she accidentally gave them her deceased sisters, which she kept as a memento.   When the police refused to return it to her Steffey began to panic and beg for it to be returned.  They eventually arrested her for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.  Once she arrived at the police station Steffey was denied her phone call and was then taken into a cell, handcuffed to the ground and stripped searched.  Not only was she forcibly strip searched by female police officers but also by men, which is against policy.  I've posted some information on the case and the video of the search, so be ware it's a bit graphic.

http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=82447

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0Oqa-oHoOo

The Movie takes place in Mexico City, it starts off with a rich man having to pay for his son's ransom, and that is what the whole movie is about, it is about money and kidnapping.  A Body Guard is hired and is being payed very low because of his alcohol problem.  He is hired to escort a daughter named Pita by a Wealthy man.  His wife took a liking to the Body Guard immediately all because he was an American.  The Body Guard had many related skills relating to being a Body Guard, however he had never protected children before.  At first the Body Guard does not want to develop a friendship with the little girl but later on he does anyway.  The Pita (the little girl/daughter of the rich guy) informs the Body Guard that there has been 24 kidnappings in the last six days, four each day.  He is some how psychologically damaged from his past, he dislikes his job so much, he tries to fit in God into his life and wonders if God would ever forgive him (because of his psychological damage I can see why he has a drinking problem). Later on both the Boday Guard and Pita take notice of a car behind them, they both write down the license plate number.  Pita is at her piano classes, the Boday Guard is waiting outside, a dog is let loose the Body Guard puts it back in the car from where it came from and all of a sudden he sees the familiar car pull up where Pita was coming out tries to kidnap her but the Body Guard pulls out his gun unfortunately cops get in the way, Boday Guard shoots and kills two, kidnappers kidnapped Pita.  Turns out the cops were not on duty and yet still had their uniform on and exactly at the scene of the crime so they were crooked cops.  A ransom was offered but no successful, later on turns out the head of the dapartment of anti-kidnapping stole half of the ransom money which was 5 million in total 10 million, but the head stole 5 million of paper not money, the other million went to the Pita's father's lawyer and the kidnappers and in a way he got some money back to help him out of debt but everything was placed on hold because the other half was fake. Of course the Body Guard discovered all of this by going back to the scene of the crimes going around asking questions to witnessess or suspects like a detective.  He builds an alliance with a newsreporter named Maria and his old partner during his lasts jobs.  The Father committed suicide and he made a deal with the kidnappers, "A life for a life."  In exchanged the main Kidnapper's brother and the BodyGuard for Pita, Pita returned safely.  Can you actually imagine going through all of that?  Of course the movie is a bit exagerated, you just wouldn't be blowing off anyone's head off out of anger.  Kidnapping happens every where in this world at any time and any place but rich people are the ultimate targets all because of the economic issues that a person faces that or because of greed.

This is actually a smart way for an Officer to get trained on how to recognize a drunk driver.  This type of training envolves police officers getting drunk inside a controlled environment while the police officers that are sober examine the intoxicated police officers motor skills and speech.  Not only that but it will also come in handy when an intoxicated person is brought into court.

 

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/02/25/dnt.cops.get.drunk.wdtn 

Often people forget that psychology is used to evaluate someone before they are hired for a job.  For example, before becoming a police officer a person must pass a psychological exam.  I found a website that was created by a person who performs these psychological exams.  Dr. Susan Clifford is a licensed psychologist who has psychologically evaluated potential workers throughout a number of public safety agencies.  Her goal for this website is to provide helpful information for any type of person who has questions related to psychology.  What caught my eye was the section on the site labeled Policework Info.  Under this heading you can find tips on how to deal with anger, what the risks are when a tired police officer is on duty, and even the psychological aspects that are relevant for police officers that have a K9 as a partner.  Also, there is a lot of helpful information in the Q&A section.  Check this website out, because it dives deep into the times and situations where psychology is seen and experienced.  Police psychology is growing in popularity, and this site will help explain what police psychology really is.

http://www.policepsych.com/

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-us-interrogation-on-film,0,1131791.story

I think that this is a great idea for the exact reasons that the ABA states: it will reduce the allegations by suspects that the detectives coerced them into a confession and it will help detect false confessions when they occur. I don't agree with the DEA that the videotapes will teach the criminals the detectives' techniques because from what I understand, these tapes won't be open to the public, and certainly not to  criminals.

The part that I like best is that it will prevent suspects and their attorneys to portray the police as abusive. I have full confidence that the "roughing up" that you sometimes see in TV shows rarely if ever occurs.

To touch on the innocence project, this could be another method to prove someone's innocence - by reviewing the interrogation tapes to see if they were in any way coerced to confess or if they seem mentally ill.