Criminal Misconduct

Gerhardt

Gerhardt

En-Route
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
4,534
Display Name
Gerhardt
battery is a crime last time I checked?

I think the officer got off with use of excessive force as a reason for termination. If you beat someone up, its battery. If an officer does it while in the course of duty (I'm guessing they were cuffing this guy to take him somewhere?") its excessive force...

The officer is screwed anyway, he's fired and now he'll probably be sued.
 
The officer did nothing wrong. Just ask another cop.
 
dell30rb said:
battery is a crime last time I checked?

I think the officer got off with use of excessive force as a reason for termination. If you beat someone up, its battery. If an officer does it while in the course of duty (I'm guessing they were cuffing this guy to take him somewhere?") its excessive force...

The officer is screwed anyway, he's fired and now he'll probably be sued.
Click to expand...

He's going to clear his name through the appeals process....
 
Basicly it's not a crime because the officer had cause to put his hands on the man, but was excessive in how he did it.

Not saying it was right, but I'd like to live in MO, job opening.
 
Gerhardt said:
http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2011/sep/21/police-officer-loses-job-over-holding-cell-inciden/

I couldn't understand why the officer wasn't charged with the crime so I called the police department and was told that "his actions didn't rise to a level of criminal misconduct." This doesn't make sense, since any one of us would be in the next cell if we did the same thing. I know we have a few folks here more familiar with the law than I am who might enlighten me.
Click to expand...

U.S. law definitely treats the actions of police differently than everyone else.
 
He is either innocent (not excessive force) or guilty (fired for excessive force). The chief, through his actions, implied he is guilty of a crime. The latter should draw a battery charge.
 
EdFred said:
The officer did nothing wrong. Just ask another cop.
Click to expand...
Yeah! What he said
lakeviewterrace.jpg
 
Gerhardt said:
http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2011/sep/21/police-officer-loses-job-over-holding-cell-inciden/

I couldn't understand why the officer wasn't charged with the crime so I called the police department and was told that "his actions didn't rise to a level of criminal misconduct." This doesn't make sense, since any one of us would be in the next cell if we did the same thing. I know we have a few folks here more familiar with the law than I am who might enlighten me.
Click to expand...

Because the burden of proof necessary to fire someone is a lot lower than it is to convict someone, and if you can't meet the burden necessary to convict someone most prosecutors would say don't bother arresting them.

Did you note this quote?

“I was fully and completely cleared by internal affairs after a thorough investigation of this incident. I was apparently fired by this chief anyway as a public relations maneuver and I fully intend to clear my name through the appeal process thank you for your time no further comments,”
Click to expand...

That could be typical BS, or it could be based in fact. Who knows? I sure wouldn't want to put the victim up on the witness stand for cross examination if I were the prosecutor.

I mostly notice the article is short on facts.
 
Last edited:
silver-eagle said:
He is either innocent (not excessive force) or guilty (fired for excessive force). The chief, through his actions, implied he is guilty of a crime. The latter should draw a battery charge.
Click to expand...

Because politics has never stained the lilly white mantle of small town law enforcement? :rofl:

Or were you saying the chief should draw a battery charge? :idea:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top