328 replies to this topic

[ChipShot]

That was down right hilarious! - I hate to break it to you but listening to Rush IS drinking kool-aid by the gallons.... but hey, he's at the head of the herd and maybe you're just be too far in the back of the pack to realize how much you're following...

Is that your idea of free thinking and non-conformity?

I don't listen to Rush very much at all, actually. Would rather listen to music.

I am a Conservative, obviously, but that doesn't mean I get my orders from Rush, et al.

It is clear that the hard Lefties, like you, do get your talking points from the far-Left-leaning media and mental giants such as Pelosi, Reid, Obama, etc, and that's fine.

Free country, ya know. Just be careful what you do with the "information" they pass on to you. Don't be a lemming, and don't chug that Kool-Aid!!

[Bill Z]

I agree , but if the city has a zero tolerance for its employees then don't treat him any different than they treated the water employee.Use same standards for police officers as they do with other employees,no special treatment.

I'm not trying to say what punishment the police officer deserves if he is found to be guilty in a court of law, but there is a big difference between the cop & the water employee.

The water employee was caught stealing from the city. That's the same as if you were caught stealing supplies from your place of work. No court of law needs to be involved, employer has the right to terminate you based on their own judgement. but an employer doesn't necessarily have the right to fire you if you were to violate some other law and be charged with a crime that had nothing to do with your employer. That would be like your boss firing you because you got a speeding ticket (presuming you aren't driving as a part of your job).

So we need to keep things straight here.

One, we need to see if the DA files charges and if so, what the outcome is?

Two, then the court will decide what his punishment for the crime will be.

Three, I don't know if it has been stated or determined if the cop performed his "midnight appropriation" of grease while on duty or not. If while on duty, then I think firing would be an appropriate action. (that would be like an employer firing an employee who is required to drive as a part of their job and while on "company time" was to commit an illegal act and get caught for it).

Four, I don't know exactly what rules the PD has with regards to "employee code of conduct", but I'm sure they have them, and if applicable, they should punish the officer appropriately for any violations of the employee code of conduct.

I am looking forward to hearing how this all comes out as opposed to all the speculation and judgements that have been made on this topic.

[Revolutionist]

He will be fired if the city uses the same type of discipline for him as they did far water dept employee(He wasn't just demoted).Or maybe they will have a double standard and just let it slide since it was a cop?

incorrect.

The assumption is that the "$350 worth of cooking oil" is in some way equal to the $40 taken from the city.

This is not the case. Since city property is in fact tax payer property, it is necessary for the city to jealously guard every nickle, and so there are very stringent codes enforced regarding city property. Even to such things as broken desk items. If there is any value at all (even to a guy who wants to take a broken lamp from the trash and fix it and use it at home), the item must be auctioned to the highest bidder, or somehow made available to the public to purchase.

The city employee was fired because he stole CITY property, not simply because he stole.

There is in fact no double-standard, no matter the outcome.

[backflow]

I'm not trying to say what punishment the police officer deserves if he is found to be guilty in a court of law, but there is a big difference between the cop & the water employee.

The water employee was caught stealing from the city. That's the same as if you were caught stealing supplies from your place of work. No court of law needs to be involved, employer has the right to terminate you based on their own judgement. but an employer doesn't necessarily have the right to fire you if you were to violate some other law and be charged with a crime that had nothing to do with your employer. That would be like your boss firing you because you got a speeding ticket (presuming you aren't driving as a part of your job).

So we need to keep things straight here.

One, we need to see if the DA files charges and if so, what the outcome is?

Two, then the court will decide what his punishment for the crime will be.

Three, I don't know if it has been stated or determined if the cop performed his "midnight appropriation" of grease while on duty or not. If while on duty, then I think firing would be an appropriate action. (that would be like an employer firing an employee who is required to drive as a part of their job and while on "company time" was to commit an illegal act and get caught for it).

Four, I don't know exactly what rules the PD has with regards to "employee code of conduct", but I'm sure they have them, and if applicable, they should punish the officer appropriately for any violations of the employee code of conduct.

I am looking forward to hearing how this all comes out as opposed to all the speculation and judgements that have been made on this topic.

How can one be trusted to uphold the law if they break the same law themselves????

[Bill Z]

How can one be trusted to uphold the law if they break the same law themselves????

Are we operating under the system of guilty unless proven innocent? When did this change in our legal system occur?

And where did I imply that "one can be trusted to uphold laws that one breaks themself", although I bet it occurs regularly. I seriously doubt that every officer that writes speeding tickets hasn't broken the speed limit while driving their personal vehicles themselves.

[ChipShot]

[quote name='Bill Z' post='278010' date='Oct 13 2008, 12:11 PM']Are we operating under the system of guilty unless proven innocent? When did this change in our legal system occur?[quote]


He sure sounds guilty to me.

And if did this for a long time, you're talking felony theft...we may never know, I guess.

Cop engages in theft = Cop loses job.

I love all the equivocating going on here!!

BTW, shouldn't a Police Sergeant know better??

[Bill Z]

He sure sounds guilty to me.

And if did this for a long time, you're talking felony theft...we may never know, I guess.

Cop engages in theft = Cop loses job.

I love all the equivocating going on here!!

BTW, shouldn't a Police Sargeant know better??

going in order of your post:

If I'm ever on trial, I hope you aren't on my jury

You may be right. But you could be wrong. What would you say if the owner or manager goes on record as saying " Yes, I told officer so & so he could have as much of the grease as he wanted"? That's why I am waiting to hear what the judge or jury says.

[ChipShot]

going in order of your post:

If I'm ever on trial, I hope you aren't on my jury

You may be right. But you could be wrong. What would you say if the owner or manager goes on record as saying " Yes, I told officer so & so he could have as much of the grease as he wanted"? That's why I am waiting to hear what the judge or jury says.

There was 6 months of investigation, so if he had permission, we wouldn't be at this point.

He was arrested, charged, and placed on leave.

Smoke, fire, etc...

[Bill Z]

There was 6 months of investigation, so if he had permission, we wouldn't be at this point.

He was arrested, charged, and placed on leave.

Smoke, fire, etc...

Amazing logic, coming from one with so much distrust of the police department, but now you trust the investigators have done a 100% bang-up job? That's what I call

[ChipShot]

Amazing logic, coming from one with so much distrust of the police department,

Uhhh, when I hear stories like this, it just reinforces the fact that this dept. seems to have some issues.

Sorry to burst your police bubble.

[backflow]

BTW , Why does it take 6 months to investigate??Seems to me it should only take 5 months at the most.

[Robert Gary]

Just for the record it was Malabar not Manderes but I did ask about this and Brent at Manderes said he gives his grease away and that the SRC recycling company just comes and takes it - they don't pay him, he doesn't pay them.

so with that being the case - would you be stealing if you took the grease that was being given away - but "claimed" by the SRC recycling company?

(just asking to see what the response is, don't make it any more then that)

Yes, its still stealing. If I go into your garage can I steal your old family photos is that ok? I mean they don't have any dollar value so it can't be stealing can it????

There is no requirement under that law to prove something has value in order to be found guilty of stealing it. All this talk about the value of the grease has nothing what-so-ever to do with anything.


BTW: If found guilty, when considering punishment I suggest you consider that this employee took an oath, the water employee did not.
-Robert

[Darth Lefty]

Did I miss where it was stated the cop definitely did not have permission from Malabar to take the oil? 17 pages later there's a lot to overlook. ie, is this a case of theft or is it a case of bootlegging?

[jafount]

Yes, its still stealing. If I go into your garage can I steal your old family photos is that ok? I mean they don't have any dollar value so it can't be stealing can it????

There is no requirement under that law to prove something has value in order to be found guilty of stealing it. All this talk about the value of the grease has nothing what-so-ever to do with anything.
BTW: If found guilty, when considering punishment I suggest you consider that this employee took an oath, the water employee did not.
-Robert

You are so very wrong about this. You have no idea what you don't know.

If a person is dumpster diving and they take something, no harm, no foul.

This was grease dumpster diving. He very well may have had permission, which is precisely why he was charged with the sections that specifically note "grease". Additionally, there is no exception as the law is written to permission, as it relates to the taking or transportation of grease. In other words, permission is not factored in. So, regardless of permission, he could still be charged with this section.

For all of you self-righteous indignant types, I would point you to the health and safety code. It is a felony to take medication not prescribed to you. It's also a felony to "self medicate". In other words, you had some left over motrin from back when you had that sprained ankle, and you jerked your back lifting something over the weekend, take that Motrin even though it was prescribed to you, you could go to prison. This includes anti-biotics, pain killers, anti-inflammatories, cough syrup, etc. Anyone ever fished without having their license out and displayed? Misdemeanor. Ever accidentally forget to renew your driver license? Misdemeanor. Ever made prank phone calls designed to harass or annoy people when you were growing up? Misdemeanor. Ever point a laser point at a person while playing around in the office? Misdemeanor.

Have you ever or do you know someone who has done any of the above? Do you think a mother should be thrown in the klink because she gave her sick child some left over amoxicillin? I'd like to think not.

Are we a nation of laws? Yes. Are these laws always reasonable? No.

Are all the facts in on this case? NO. Does this MAN deserve his day in court as ANY OTHER CITIZEN would be permitted? Absolutely.

I go back to my original statement. Simple people are borderline orgasmic when they see a person whom they perceive are in an authority position over them, fall. You get off on it. It's exciting. You need to get a life.

One final thought...people who have aspirations higher than their current position often steamroll others as a way to "establish" themselves. I'm sure every person here has had a crappy boss at one time or another in their life. Wouldn't it make sense that there is an Admin with a hard-on for burning guys just like I suspect Chip Robert Gary some people would be if they were smart enough to get into some sort of management position? People like that don't care who they mow over so why couldn't that be true in this case?

Power is a funny thing. Some can handle the responsibility. Others think it gives them carte blanche to micro manage. Others go on to be legislators and congressmen.

[mylo]

Did I miss where it was stated the cop definitely did not have permission from Malabar to take the oil? 17 pages later there's a lot to overlook. ie, is this a case of theft or is it a case of bootlegging?

Permission or not, he's not authorized to transport it. Stupid law, but they'd fine us just the same.