Avoiding Accountability
Police officers long for the days when they can make up any facts they wish about an encounter with the public and make them stick. That is why, even if the public were required to videotape police, my guess is that officers would still find a reason to arrest them for wiretapping.
Matt:
'"We are enforcing the law, and we don't make any apologies for that," said Greg Shipley, Maryland State Police.'
That bipedal rottweiler would happily load anyone outside his gang onto a cattle car.
"Just doing my job" cannot ever, ever relieve one of their primary obligation: determine right from wrong and act accordingly.
May 25, 2010, 11:34 amColoComment:
"Police officers long for the days when they can make up any facts they wish about an encounter with the public and make them stick."
I find that an appalling statement. Do you really believe that? Do you really have that kind of contempt for your local law enforcement agencies and personnel?
What an anomalous police officer does or says in Maryland should not indiscriminately tarnish every police officer across the country, anymore than my experience of a discourteous (or lying) campground manager should tarnish my estimation of campground managers nationwide or impugn their motives.
The Maryland officers will most likely be found to have acted inappropriately. Most states' wiretapping laws prohibit eavesdropping on PRIVATE oral, electronic or data communications without the consent of at least one or in some cases all of the participants, depending on the particular state. A police officer taking action against someone in a public space has no expectation whatsoever of privacy. I don't see how any of the most common types of state wiretapping laws could apply.
As I have suggested here in the past, before you make such wild accusations, you should call your local law enforcement agency, do a ride along, and actually make their acquaintance and learn how they do what they do.
May 25, 2010, 3:59 pmAndrew:
@ColoComment:
Clearly not ALL police officers are corrupt, I expect that the percentage is at least similar to the percentage of corrupt citizens however, fair to say?
The problem is that corrupt officers have power, corrupt private citizens do not.
May 26, 2010, 12:02 amColoComment:
@ Andrew:
Clearly, the scope of the original statement was not qualified in the least, and I have not found Warren's past posts to be sloppy in composition.
"percentage is at least similar to the percentage of corrupt citizens however"
I have no data to support or refute that statement, or to even agree that it may be "fair to say." However, I DO have personal familiarity with the extremely stringent background checks, multiple personality and integrity interview processes, and performance measurements that currently are in place, emphasized and strictly enforced in several law enforcement agencies in Colorado and Arizona, and which, absent evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe are fairly representative of the level of behavior, honesty and integrity required by today's law enforcement agencies nation-wide.
No LE agency wants to find a video of its personnel doing stupid stuff going viral on YouTube. A reputable LE agency will not long tolerate personnel who put its reputation in jeopardy.
I can make no claim to understanding the stupidity and error of the Maryland police who claimed to be just "following the law." However, I would bet you dollars to donuts, that their tenure in that agency has just been shortened. As it should be....
May 26, 2010, 9:53 amColoComment:
See, for example: http://www.larimersheriff.org/BullsEye/
May 26, 2010, 10:23 am