And it doesn't require legal services. In local news.........Joe
Former St. Cloud cop pleads guilty in gun trafficking case | Osceola News Gazette
A Crook is a Crook
- Thread starter biku324
- Start date
And it doesn't require legal services. In local news.........Joe
Former St. Cloud cop pleads guilty in gun trafficking case | Osceola News Gazette
'The DWI Enterprise': Thousands of DWI cases could be connected to ongoing scandal
Thomas Clear was the attorney of record for 2,490 DWI cases over 30 years. 15 APD officers accounted for nearly 100 DWI arrests connected to Clear, over the past five years
'The DWI Enterprise': Thousands of DWI cases could be connected to ongoing scandal
A, LT, with IA, resigned last year.
Thomas Clear was the attorney of record for 2,490 DWI cases over 30 years. 15 APD officers accounted for nearly 100 DWI arrests connected to Clear, over the past five years
'The DWI Enterprise': Thousands of DWI cases could be connected to ongoing scandal
A, LT, with IA, resigned last year.
Last edited:
Scapegoating one subset? You mean the drunks?
Going easier on drunk drivers is not a hill I'd die on. This isn't the 50s and it's not cute. Would you like some references of some folks who lost kids to drunks?
YeshuaIsa53
Member
When someone comes to a crook in the road, most people slow down a little then go on their merry way.
OP
The good news is that this scandal was discovered, albeit 30 years late.
LoboGunLeather
US Veteran
The worst examples of criminal activity are those committed by people in positions of trust. Cops in the line of duty, ministers attending to their congregations, attorneys as officers of the courts, elected and appointed officials at all levels of government, school officials, the list goes on and on.
Some act out of arrogance, some act out of greed, some act out of mental or emotional problems, some simply succumb to temptation.
Most states have, like New Mexico, reacted to drunk driving problems out of political considerations. Taking a relatively common traffic offense and elevating it to a level similar to intentional and violent criminal acts, mandatory arrest policies, attaching enormous penalties (fines, jail time, civil actions restricting driver licensing, etc) that can be much greater for a first-time DUI than for a repeat violent offender.
Passing such laws is easy to do, and rewards legislators with voter approval at election times. Arresting the perpetrators gains praise an accolades for police officers (as well as increased funding via grants and revenue sharing policies). Prosecuting the offenders secures public attorneys of positive publicity and increased support at the polls.
Meanwhile, the cops see the huge majority of criminal defendants walk without charges, or negotiated plea deals with little in the way of actual penalties while the officers are subjected to attacks at every step of the process. Do some of them wonder why they should bother, why they should do the paperwork, why they should miss days off or change vacation plans in order to attend court proceedings?
Prosecutors face choices every day based on budgets, staffing, court schedules, and other factors. Decisions must be made about which cases to proceed with, which to bargain away, and which to dismiss. I suspect that such decisions may be based upon likelihood of winning, likelihood of advancement, likelihood of positive publicity.
Defense attorneys probably understand the limitations of the justice system and how things can be manipulated in favor of clients paying their fees, while also building a reputation that draws more paying clients.
Not a perfect system, certainly, but probably the best system ever devised for a free society.
I'm not making excuses for any person or group, just trying to offer some perspective. Everybody involved is human, and every human is subject to failures (performance, judgement, attitude, moral, ethical, a long list).
Still, those in positions of trust must be given the fullest possible treatment, no breaks, no sympathy. Stake them out on the anthill and walk away. Set the example for everyone else.
Kind of like how I would like to see the entire system work in every case.
Some act out of arrogance, some act out of greed, some act out of mental or emotional problems, some simply succumb to temptation.
Most states have, like New Mexico, reacted to drunk driving problems out of political considerations. Taking a relatively common traffic offense and elevating it to a level similar to intentional and violent criminal acts, mandatory arrest policies, attaching enormous penalties (fines, jail time, civil actions restricting driver licensing, etc) that can be much greater for a first-time DUI than for a repeat violent offender.
Passing such laws is easy to do, and rewards legislators with voter approval at election times. Arresting the perpetrators gains praise an accolades for police officers (as well as increased funding via grants and revenue sharing policies). Prosecuting the offenders secures public attorneys of positive publicity and increased support at the polls.
Meanwhile, the cops see the huge majority of criminal defendants walk without charges, or negotiated plea deals with little in the way of actual penalties while the officers are subjected to attacks at every step of the process. Do some of them wonder why they should bother, why they should do the paperwork, why they should miss days off or change vacation plans in order to attend court proceedings?
Prosecutors face choices every day based on budgets, staffing, court schedules, and other factors. Decisions must be made about which cases to proceed with, which to bargain away, and which to dismiss. I suspect that such decisions may be based upon likelihood of winning, likelihood of advancement, likelihood of positive publicity.
Defense attorneys probably understand the limitations of the justice system and how things can be manipulated in favor of clients paying their fees, while also building a reputation that draws more paying clients.
Not a perfect system, certainly, but probably the best system ever devised for a free society.
I'm not making excuses for any person or group, just trying to offer some perspective. Everybody involved is human, and every human is subject to failures (performance, judgement, attitude, moral, ethical, a long list).
Still, those in positions of trust must be given the fullest possible treatment, no breaks, no sympathy. Stake them out on the anthill and walk away. Set the example for everyone else.
Kind of like how I would like to see the entire system work in every case.
Yeah, no thanks to the LAW enforcement officials who knew about the scheme and looked the other way.
It took a civilian who thought he was getting hosed and another attorney who went to the FBI to get things going.
Oh, the irony!
Not to knock law enforcement because I appreciate what they do and the vast majority are highly ethical.
I knew a lot of police officers back in the 80's and attempting to get a DUI arrest near the end of their shift was commonplace for the O/T. Guys working the 8pm - 3am shift posting up near a drinking establishment and pulling folks over for a bad license plate light or failing to signal etc. usually did the trick.
I had personal experience with this scenario one night. My wife myself and a friend were at a local pub until close to closing time.
Sure enough 30 seconds after leaving the parking lot flashing lights in the rear view and an office was pulling us over.
My wife who does not drink was lugging us lushes around, so no worries.
After sticking his head almost in my wife's face and realizing she had not been drinking the guy scolded her about her license plate bulb being out then damn near ran back to his cruiser to get back to the pub before the crowd cleared out.
Doug M.
Member
Aggressive traffic enforcement is one of the best ways to interdict criminals of all types. I have never found anything that contradicts the research from the 70s on that issue.
As for hanging out by the watering holes looking for impaired drivers, where is better? Local LE here has a loop through the high volume drinking areas, and WSP sometimes joins in the feeding frenzy. Don't want the sharks to come after you, don't chum them.
As for hanging out by the watering holes looking for impaired drivers, where is better? Local LE here has a loop through the high volume drinking areas, and WSP sometimes joins in the feeding frenzy. Don't want the sharks to come after you, don't chum them.
Last edited:
New Mexico State Police Chief addresses federal probe of DWI Sgt.
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlxvJIjX5xc[/ame]
What's funny about the interview, is that the NMSP was publicly saying that no NMSP officers were involved, even though the paralegal who flipped first specifically named the agencies involved, including the NMSP. Now, he's admitting that they were, in fact, looking at the officer in question for involvement. I'm sure the Feds told the chief months ago who was involved, but he lied anyway.
In the end it all comes out, so why lie and deny? Kinda throws the credibility in the toilet.
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlxvJIjX5xc[/ame]
What's funny about the interview, is that the NMSP was publicly saying that no NMSP officers were involved, even though the paralegal who flipped first specifically named the agencies involved, including the NMSP. Now, he's admitting that they were, in fact, looking at the officer in question for involvement. I'm sure the Feds told the chief months ago who was involved, but he lied anyway.
In the end it all comes out, so why lie and deny? Kinda throws the credibility in the toilet.
Doug M.
Member
IMHO, executive level officers are the least credible. That has certainly been my experience with the WSP. The stuff I have seen that should have resulted in felony prosecutions at the highest levels of the agency is appalling. I am not sure that they even understand that the acts are felonies, because their legal training and advising is so poor.
That may not explain the situation here - there may have been reasons why the Chief was informed but told not to disclose it until there was an arrest. I have seen such as a prosecutor.
That may not explain the situation here - there may have been reasons why the Chief was informed but told not to disclose it until there was an arrest. I have seen such as a prosecutor.
Those who use a position of public trust for criminal gain should get twice as much time instead of any leniency. Burglars and thieves are not swearing to serve and protect. Betraying the trust the public places in you increases the severity of their criminal actions.
I spent the summer of '75 in Easthampton in a house with a group of friends. The popo would park about a quarter mile away from the bars on Montauk Highway. Easy pickings.
My friend here in NC who is a magistrate for 20 more years, said that there are three types who become cops.
1) Bullies. These are the ones who want to push others around, about 10% are like this.
2) Public Servants. True servants of mankind. Maybe were told as kids that cops were noble. I wish there were more than 10%.
3) The VAST Majority, All the rest! People who needed a job at the moment the city was hiring.
Another friend now retired, was running the personnel depart for the local PD and I asked him if what the magistrate said was true. He said yes, only added that those who get hired are the ones who can pass the background check. One drunk driving charge in college or especially a Mary Jane arrest in college and no hire. Not that the ones he hired were innocent he knew, they were just the ones who never got stopped.
It is important that we socially set up these people in the public eye as heros for the sake of the future. We offer the entire profession the respect deserved by the 10% in hope that in future the best of our children will serve and protect.
1) Bullies. These are the ones who want to push others around, about 10% are like this.
2) Public Servants. True servants of mankind. Maybe were told as kids that cops were noble. I wish there were more than 10%.
3) The VAST Majority, All the rest! People who needed a job at the moment the city was hiring.
Another friend now retired, was running the personnel depart for the local PD and I asked him if what the magistrate said was true. He said yes, only added that those who get hired are the ones who can pass the background check. One drunk driving charge in college or especially a Mary Jane arrest in college and no hire. Not that the ones he hired were innocent he knew, they were just the ones who never got stopped.
It is important that we socially set up these people in the public eye as heros for the sake of the future. We offer the entire profession the respect deserved by the 10% in hope that in future the best of our children will serve and protect.
Last edited:
LVSteve
Member
Could be worse, a grand jury could be saying "fire them all".
Grand jury recommends Alabama police department be '''abolished'''
Grand jury recommends Alabama police department be '''abolished'''
Doug M.
Member
I saw a report about that Alabama agency. My gut response would peel the paint off of a battleship.
pantannojack
US Veteran
I have been looking for an older movie: "The Take" featuring a pair of NM LEO's on the take. in the near end of the film one says to the other something like: to cover yourself you got to be a good cop.
How many, total, over 30 years, are involved who participated or looked the other way? 30 years is an entire generation of dirty cops who've made their way through the ranks. There's way more than what's publicly been released. Way more.
The current APD Chief Medina, was a police officer with APD for 20 years before retiring as commander in 2014 before being appointed Chief in 2020. He said he didn't know anything and was shocked.
Yeah, right, I says.
I don't think it is that complicated for most people who choose to commit money crimes. It is the desire for perceived easy money. Easy money is attractive to the lazy and the irresponsible. I wrote 'perceived easy money' because the irony is that the money frequently turns out to be anything but easy when the consequences of being caught catch up.
