35 replies to this topic

[mylo]

I agree. Shop Folsom and Skank Folsom!

We can build on this.

Think globally, skank locally!

[supermom]

No, he didn't commit the crime, but he should have been in-charge of their dismissal and so he is at fault if their claims of procedural violations on their dismissal are correct.

I don't know about that--I am not a trained cop.

My understanding is that internal investigations are handled in a such a manner that the "chief" may or may not have knowledge of the investigation until after the fact.

[a little bean]

Maybe you could argue blase, but condescending? As Inigo Montoya would say "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means"

[supermom]

Maybe you could argue blase, but condescending? As Inigo Montoya would say "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means"

Perhaps, but condescending to the other cops or the victims involved--certainly yes.

condescending that all he got was a loss of a job.

He may be a great guy, he may have been a great cop.

But I don't want cops like that in Folsom.

And I certainly wouldn't want other cops in folsom to think, "dang, the poor guy lost his job over screwing a college girl he was investigating? That's too bad".

Heck no. I think that many of them are super embarrassed and prolly hope that no one thinks they would act like this as well.

[supermom]

So what is the policy on transparency when it comes to our finest being investigated for wrong-doing?

How is the public supposed to know if their tax dollars are actually being used to protect them with LE that are trustworthy and honorable?

When do we-the public--find out that these two cops have received proper justice for their crimes?

[parklover]

Here is how it will play out. First the officers will be investigated by internal affairs, then a recommendation will be given to the Chief who will decide whether to fire or reprimand the officers.
If fired, they fight it. Thus the City of Folsom will hire an outside firm. The officers are already insured by PORAC. Thus their representation is already paid for. All officers take this insurance and its usually required by the Police Union or (FPCOA).

The City is self-insured, thus we pay for it. After a year or so of pleadings, motions, discovery, a possible settlement or arbitration will take place. If the attorney for the police believe that there is a possibility of them getting their jobs back, it would be up to the Chief, who usually will pay and not reenlist.

Point shortened, when a director, chief, or manager continues to cost the city money because of the mistakes of his/her employees, he/she is vicariously liable. This example has been set down the road many times. Remember

Head of parks before Robert Goss- He was asked to retire because the city paid out a $250,000 sexual harrasment suit.(2004)

Director of waste management was fired because of the $750,000 accidental waste dump into the river

City Manager Martha was asked to resign because of the lawsuit over the low income housing which the city lost.

Now we have had incident over incident with the police department costing the city(us) money. Thus its time for a new chief. What is more scary to me, is that Sam has been so well entrenched in this position, friends with city counsel, and manager, that mistakes somehow avoid there consequences.v When one has absolute power, he is corrupt absolutely.(old saying)

The new energy that a new Chief will bring to Folsom will be a boost. It wil be positive on the officers of the department, maybe even one from the department will be promoted. I dont know. But change is good.

My best guess is that this thing will settle out behind closed counsel doors for 75,000 per officer. If procedural formalities were not followed. This based on previous experience. Thus another $150,000 gone from general fund.

If procedural formalities were followed I would guess $25,000 per officer. The cost of litigation though trial. Either way we lose money. Now the moral question, it how much could be have saved by keeping the officers and reprimanding them or was their crime to great? Thats the question posed to the Chief after all its not his money.