Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by WilyCoyote, Oct 25, 2011.
How'd you like to be the supervisor handling this one?
I especially like how the officer is yelling at the detective to walk down the stairwell as he has him pinned to the class. umm.......yeah.
It's guys like that that give cops a bad name. Unfortunately there are a lot of guys like that. I understand you can't just let a guy go... But holding a guy against the wall where you are telling him to not be/leave is a little counterproductive. But hey, that's just me.
The on duty officer is always right, same agency or not.
Holding him to the wall, while telling him to step away is correct? He may have the authority to tell him to step back away, but this is concerning procedure. I don't agree with how he handled it. This of course is why departments have IA investigations to find out what is really going on, hopefully.
In my experience when you ask, tell, make a person do something you make it possible for that person to do the something that you are telling him to do. By holding him back when you have asked, told the detective to do the opposite then you have just created a situation where the detective is unable to comply. If the off duty detective continued to try to force his way past the officer then the officer should have used force to steer him the other way, while calling for assistance. Holding him against part of a building does not accomplish that, with the exception that it keeps him from going past the officer. You make a way of egress for the suspect in this case, if indeed he is a suspect and not there for official business, which again IA will look into, I assume.
After all, they apparently knew each other. Even if the detective would have left, (which apparently was the goal of the officer providing security), and went in elsewhere, the detective was known not only by the officer doing security, but by the agency who employed the detective.
Yeah. I have to say that telling someone to leave and not allowing him to leave just creates a bad situation.
I also have to say that the off duty detective went immediately to the white shirt upon his arrival. Thats obviously someone who is not afraid to let the higher ups know what is going on, which is usually someone who thinks they are in the right.
I agree it's a cluster, but thats why they make supervisors and IA. Thankfully as a patrol officer, you separate the two officers and let the boss handle it from there. It would be interesting to see why the detective was there and if he really was on official business.
Sounds like people were blocking the doorway, was that maybe an abortion clinic? I wonder if he was there with the protestors and tried to badge his way out of trouble when the cop in the dayglo showed up?
Other than that, the only comment I'll make is you never get into a dick measuring contest with a guy in a long coat. Cause if he's willing to enter that sort of contest in that coat..... he's... ahem... got something up his sleeve.
"Roger Dickinson is with CPDs Strategic Response Bureau, Criminal Information Unit, He and his partner are the two officers on the CPD whose job it is to oversee events in the City of Columbus where there is a known potential for violence. (OSU sporting events, political gatherings, and protests, for example)".
More here: http://www.lifenews.com/2011/10/21/planned-parenthood-security-guard-assaults-police-officer/ , but consider the source.
Consider the source?
But, if we're going to consider the source:
What about the source? I am naturally curious concerning that part of your statement. As a Christian I do not see anything wrong in their statement.
Sounds like both of them are going to end up in trouble. Let me see if I get this straight.
The off duty detective in plain clothes shows up at a protest. Part of his job involves dealing with such protests but it almost sounded as if he was involved with this protest. When the protestors use "friend" in their statement it worries me. I don't think anyone would ever call me their friend when I deal with them in a work context. "Friendly" maybe but never "friend."
Then the off duty but uniformed guy maybe gets the meaning of the muni cde wrong when it comes to protests. OF course the other guy could be wrong too. Of course his response is to pin the off duty detective against the wall. Me personally I would just report the guy to my boss. If I am right then the detective gets told to butt out unless he is there on the clock. If he is there as a protestor then he gets told he better watch what he says or he will get his dick in a wringer.
It will be intersting to see what happens. I suspect we will never know for sure since it is a personnel matter.
They both should have gotten the on duty supervisor over before they started measuring peckers.
I agree. However, for a lot of folks in this profession, or similar professions to be A+ personality and handle it on their own. I have dealt with similar attitudes at work.
It appears to me that the uniform was at one point planning on arresting the defective; he has his cuffs in his hand.
I'm working off the assumption that the defective was there for personal reasons and was refusing to leave after being ordered to do so. That looked like Easton to me, which is all private property, even streets and sidewalks (and the Shadowbox is not an abortion clinic, though that would be a sweet name for one).
So the uniform is hired to work special duty by the property owners or tenants, and he tries to eject a guy from the property who is an unwanted person, that guy refuses, the next logical step is to arrest him for trespass. I would bet the reason it went down like it did is the uniform recognized the defective after the wheels were set in motion, and didn't want to arrest the guy and jam him up.
His mistake, it seems. If thats what happened, he should have arrested the defective.
If that's not what happened, well I'm all ears...
No matter what happened, you're a fool to disobey a uniformed CPD officer.
Yeah, but at the same time, if the detective was on duty then it's a whole other ballgame. I know our criminal intelligence unit works in plain clothes and will walk around as part of a crowd. If they are on duty, they are on duty and the trespass provisions don't apply. I don't know if he was on duty or off duty. If he's off duty, then yes, he's just another protester. If he's on duty, he's not.
And I know that when we have a point of contact for events, many times the organizers will go through them whenever they have a problem, even if they aren't present at the event when the problem starts.
And while the link to the protesters side is going to be biased, I don't know if they'd get major facts wrong like "he was on duty and not a protester." If they messed that up, then their whole story would go out the window.
I didn't even consider that the defective was working, I don't see how that could be be possible.
He could be in a plain clothes position that interacts with protesters to ensure they follow the laws, get permits, etc. Then he can stop in on the protest and ensure they are following the laws while wearing normal clothes and not a uniform. Many times people act differently around a uniform than they do when there isn't one. Like I said, I know we use plain clothes people during big events like concerts, parades, July 4th, protests, etc. Plus it helps single out the agitators for the uniformed guys to come and get.