Police Unions & Law Enforcement Rights

I’ve have thought about writing this for a couple of months, however, I felt that with all the animosity of this Presidential election people wouldn’t read or consider anything objectively.  Now that the election has occurred and people seem to have calmed down, at least for now, I wanted to share some thoughts.

 

First, I want to tell you a bit of my experience in order that you understand what I’m basing my thoughts on.  I was in law enforcement for 38 years (1981-2019) as a sworn officer (person with arrest powers), the last 6 years as a Chief/ Manager.  I spent 5 years investigating police misconduct and investigating or supervising investigations of misconduct of other employees.  I served as a Commissioner on the Florida Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission which governs the certification (licensing) of Law Enforcement, Corrections and Probation Officers within the state.  During my career I’ve also served as an Employee Representative, elected officer and State President for a law enforcement “union” and met with State Legislators on police rights.  I point this out to also demonstrate that I’ve been on both sides, ensuring rights were observed and as a manager recommending and enforcing discipline when a complaint against an officer was sustained.  While most of my experiences are with the State of Florida statutes other states have similar provisions in their statutes or regulations.

 

In the weeks after George Floyd’s death there were protests around the country, some were violent.  During and after the protests politicians and police chiefs were criticized for not terminating “bad cops”.  Some responded to this criticism by blaming police unions and/ or police rights.  As they used this excuse people began to believe and agree with them!  If you say something long enough people will believe it, if people perceive something to be true than it is true regardless of the facts.  A major problem with this is that it can cause action to be taken that will actually harm people.  The rights that people complain are protecting “bad cops” only pertain to Administrative Investigations, if the investigation is criminal the Constitutions Rights apply, not the Administrative Rights. 

 

So, let me ask what is wrong with Administrative Rights?  In an Administrative Investigation the officer is compelled to give a statement and cannot refuse to answer questions because of the Constitutional Right that a person cannot be forced to give evidence against themselves.  The only exception in Administrative Rights is that if an officer lies; commits perjury, during the Administrative Investigation, then the information can be used in a criminal prosecution.  That is why an agency will normally interview the subject officer last, they will conduct an investigation and determine if there will is evidence of criminal behavior, if not then they will conduct an administrative interview.  If during an administrative interview an officer indicates that there may have been criminal behavior the interview will be stopped, and the subject officer advised of his/ her Constitutional Rights.

 

During an Administrative Investigation, an officer has a right to know their accuser, know the evidence against them, be interviewed during there duty hours when possible and that they be allowed to take breaks when necessary.  Citizens get upset when there is an officer involved shooting or incident in which a person dies and the officer choses not to give a statement on that same day, many will insist that the agency should have made the officer give a statement and because of their anger don’t realize why the officer wasn’t forced to provide a statement!  When a person becomes a law enforcement officer, they do not forfeit their Constitutional Rights.  In many states there are specific administrative rights for officers because in years past they were treated as if they had limited Constitutional Rights.  My question to people would be if you are angered when you believe an officer violated a person’s rights why do you support violating an officer’s rights?

 

Administrative Rights are not the evil that some have portrayed them to be.  When I was the Chief Steward for the City of Miami (FL) police union (FOP Miami Lodge #20) I attended a county Community Relations Board’s (CRB) Law Enforcement subcommittee meeting.  There were two activists that were arguing against the state’s Peace Officers Bill of Rights and wanted this subcommittee to recommend that the CRB go on the record and lobby the State Legislature to repeal that statute.  I sat there and listened to the activists presentation and argument for repeal.  After they finished, I was introduced to the committee by the staffer, I was asked if I would like to make any comment before they voted to support a repeal of the statute?  I asked the committee members if they had ever actually read the statute they were about to vote on?  None of the committee had ever read the statute so I passed out copies and asked the members to read the statute first and then I’d be willing to discuss their concerns.  After reading the statute the members asked me if that was it, was there anymore?  I replied that I had given them the complete statute, the chairperson looked at the activists and said that the statute was only fair for officers and asked them what specifically they objected to (I had given the activists a copy as well).  Those two men got up from the table and left the room without saying anything, the committee voted not to recommend or support a repeal.  I tell this story only to show that people should not react in the heat of the moment or while angry.

 

As far as Police Unions are concerned, they protect an officer’s rights and negotiate employment benefits, they DO NOT protect criminal behavior!  The union ensures that the police administration does not attempt to take short cuts in an administrative investigation which will cause a termination to be   overturned on appeal.  Some larger unions may hire professional people to assist in the running of the union but many (like the one I was involved with) are run by law enforcement officers.  They do not want “bad cops” on their department, but they cannot stand by and be quiet when an administration violates an officer’s rights.  You cannot pick and choose whose rights should be protected or else all will lose their rights.  If an administration violates an officer’s rights to gain a termination what is to prevent them from condoning someone violating a citizen’s rights during an investigation?  Police unions take on that fight to preserve the integrity of the profession.

 

Are there aspects of the judicial system that can and should be fixed or improved, of course, but the answer cannot be violating the rights of officers.  The hardest thing to do is to defend the rights of someone you dislike, the vast majority of law enforcement officers’ practice that philosophy every day and should be treated the same.  However, meaningful changes will not be made by first alienating people, police unions are willing to work with citizens to ensure that they have a police agency that all will be proud of.  Police unions and police administrations can provide an understanding of why there are certain procedures and practices, but we must be willing to listen to each other and stop shouting or blaming each other.

 

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours

A re-introduction

I was just looking and since starting this blog back in 2009 there have been nearly 4,200 views, 72 this weekend alone so far (I didn’t always share posts on Facebook and Twitter).  Since I’ve begun writing again there are some new viewers of this blog, I thought I would take a moment to reintroduce myself and why I started this blog.

 

When I was in middle school a teacher encouraged me to write short stories.  I found that I really enjoyed writing and was encouraged to write speeches and enter Speech contests, I took first place in the local competition and second in a countywide contest.  Fast forward to adulthood, during my law enforcement career I became active in my agency’s fraternal organization and union.  I joined the executive board and I had to write newsletter articles from time to time, while I hated deadlines, I really enjoyed the writing to get my message out.  I became an executive officer with the state organization, eventually becoming State President.  I would have to write for the quarterly newsletter and when we created our web site.  As President I not only wrote a quarterly President’s Message, I also had a section created on the web site where I could write a message between the quarterly publication.

 

After my successor was elected, I missed writing so in 2009 I decided to begin a blog and write from time to time to share my thoughts and opinions on issues.  It was my hope and still is to have a forum to share ideas and engage in a civil dialogue.  I am asked from time to time for my opinion on issues based on my 38 years law enforcement experience and I will share those thoughts.  We may not always agree but without an exchange of ideas we cannot grow.

 

 

 

Consistency

(This was written prior to the election but I wasn't able to publish it at the time)

Is it possible to have some consistency any more when it comes to politics?

In 2016 information was “leaked” that became known as the Steele Dossier.  Immediately people condemned Trump as a traitor, without any verification of the information people insisted that Trump was guilty, politicians demanded that there needed to be an investigation.  Despite it being shown that the information and allegations were not true people to this day insist that President Trump was guilty and committed treason.

Fast forward to 2020, the NY Post published two articles about Hunter Biden’s business dealings.  There are emails that indicate that Former V. P. Joe Biden received a percentage of monies Hunter and his business received, in an email from Hunter to one of his children he says that his children don’t have to worry because they won’t have to pay him a percentage of any money they make like he has to do to his father the former V.P. A business associate confirmed the legitimacy of the business emails and that he attended business meetings with Joe Biden.

In 2016 when the “Steele Dossier” was leaked the media, including social media, they published the info and allowed people to share the info, even after it was proved to be false (it was also proved false in a British Court when Christopher Steele was sued).  Flash forward to 2020, the information on Hunter Biden’s business dealing and payments to Joe Biden come out and most media refuse to publish at first, some eventually mentioned it but claimed none of the information had been confirmed.  Social media blocked the sharing of the NY Post stories, Twitter not only blocked it they locked out the NY Post Twitter account and demanded they post a retraction before they can have access to their account again.  It was also learned that the FBI had the information a few months ago and has opened an investigation (some say the FBI case number indicates its a money laundering case) and yet those that demanded Trump was guilty and not qualified nor should he be allowed to serve as President without an investigation or even confirmation of the info are now silent or saying that this should be ignored because it hasn’t been confirmed (even though some has).  Until an investigation is completed I won't pass judgement on the Biden's.

What has helped make this a great country is consistency, our insisting that people we don’t like or hate are treated the same as those we support.  Right or wrong can’t have different meanings for different people, it has to mean the same for all.

People get upset when they learn of a person being freed from prison after years or even decades because it was learned that information was withheld or falsified, there was misconduct by government officials (prosecutors or law enforcement) and everyone should be upset! However, we can not accept or condone this when it happens to someone we have political differences with!

A DOJ attorney has pled guilty of falsifying information and presenting it to a court (FISA) to obtain a search warrant.  Specifically, the FBI had learned of a former Trump campaign person meeting with Russians.  The CIA was contacted and asked if they were aware of these meetings and if the former Trump campaign person was a CIA asset?  The CIA replied that the agency was aware of the meetings, that the person was an asset and reporting to the CIA about the meetings.  The DOJ attorney edited that email so that it read that the CIA was not aware of the meetings and that the person was not an asset and then presented that edited email to the court as justification for a FISA warrant (this is a simplified basic summary of what occurred).  Where was the outrage that a government official would falsify information to a court to target an American citizen.

Declassified testimony has revealed that people who were on television programs saying the Trump campaign colluded with Russians testified under oath during classified hearings that they had no evidence of collusion with the Russians, Russians tried but were unable to infiltrate the Trump campaign.  According to former Representative Trey Gowdy he even asked if they had any information/ rumors of Russian collusion that couldn't be used in court and the responses were no they did not have any information.  Where is the outrage?  If the same thing was done to the Obama campaign would your reaction be the same?  

Unfortunately even people involved in the law and law enforcement that did not support Trump have not expressed any problem with people violating the law since their actions were in an attempt to remove a President from office that they didn't/ don't support!  If you've been outraged by someone being sent to prison for years because officials either falsified information or withheld evidence/ information favorable to the defendant why aren't you angry, where has your outrage been?

Politics should not determine if you believe in our fundamental principle, innocent until proven guilty. Is it possible to have some consistency any more when it comes to politics?

That's My Opinion, What's Yours

Morning Rant: “Fact Checkers”

 There has been a lot of talk recently about Facebook, Twitter and other social media fact checking.  It has been shown that these so called fact checkers are not impartial, they either post a warning that pops up if you try to look at a post or they will take down a post or lock an account that they don’t agree with.  They’ve even gone as far as locking out a major news publication out of their account and demanding they take down a story they don’t like.  

As if interfering with the freedom of the press isn’t bad enough Twitter has even gone as far as censoring a political pundit’s Twitter account because these “fact checkers” didn’t like something he tweeted.  The comment that the “fact checkers” found offensive was a quotation from the U.S. Constitution!

There are a lot of things I see posted on social media that I disagree with and don’t like, there are friends that post political opinions that I disagree with but as long as these posts aren’t calling for violence or other criminal conduct they should not be censored!  People should be allowed to post their thoughts and opinions and I should be allowed to post my disagreement!

I have seen people cheer when “fact checkers” have taken some sort of action against a person’s post they disagree with or dislike!  I would remind anyone that approves or cheers censorship that a pendulum swings both ways!  History has shown that the pendulum of censorship will swing far left and eventually swing back in the other direction and go far to the right.  If you cheer “fact checkers” now be prepared for the time when your posts, people and causes you support, are censored by supposed “fact checkers”. To make it even simpler there is a popular saying, “What goes around, comes around”.

One of the things that has had people risking their life and family future to come to the United States since its inception was that they would be free to express themself even if their thoughts are contrary to the majority.  People need to stand up to censorship when they’re not the subject of it otherwise it will continue and someday will turn on them, when that happens people will be afraid to speak out for fear that they will be next.

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours

People have labeled me and my politics, but are they correct?

 

Over the years when I have made a post or posted a comment about someone else’s posting on social media that was political people have made judgements and accusations about my politics.  They were sure they knew my political beliefs and freely expressed their belief about my political leanings online, like a lot of people it got worse during the 2016 Presidential campaign and the first year of the Trump administration.  Finally I got frustrated and posted examples of when I was told I was a flaming liberal and others when I was a far right conservative and even called a closet bigot, I asked people if they were so sure of my politics to post what they believed they were and why.  Well it has been over three years and no one has taken me up on the challenge of describing my politics.  I decided to go ahead and answer that challenge before writing a few article ideas I have.

 

Here is a refresher for those that saw my original challenge on social media and a little history for those that didn’t see it.  When then Senator Obama announced that he was going to run in the primary for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States I expressed that I was glad and was looking forward to voting for him, I was labeled a liberal.  Then after he won the nomination and I began to watch some one on one interviews and presentations broadcast on CSPAN I had issues with his stated goals and policy ideas.  I thought if President Obama was successful with some of his goals, especially regarding fossil fuels, I believed that lower income people would be hurt the most because of the resulting increased fuel costs that would result.  For that I was labeled right wing, some said my disagreements were based on race and nothing more.

 

When I thought some of the media and Republican politicians’ criticisms were not valid and said so I was called a liberal or someone that was only defending the President to show that I was not a bigot.  Then after President Trump was elected I would do the same as I did during the Obama administration, if I agreed with something I would say so and if I thought something was wrong or handled incorrectly I said so.  The result was more of the same and sometimes worse, I had people that I had known for decades, people that I considered friends tell me that they never thought I was a bigot or supporter of bigotry.  However, when they read something, I posted criticizing something the media had done (just as I had done when President Obama was in office) they now realized that I was a “closet bigot”.

 

Well since people decided instead of answering my challenge just continue labeling me with their perception I thought before I wrote any more political pieces I would take the time to tell you my political views and maybe then you can label me based on some facts instead of your preconceived ideas.

 

I was born in the latter part of the 1950’s in Pittsburgh, Pa but the first President I remember is John F. Kennedy.  I remember his campaign and adults talking about his being an Irish Catholic, needless to say my being of Irish decent and Catholic this got my attention.  During the 1960’s I began to pay attention and formed some opinions, people thought that they may have been my mother or grandfather’s ideas, but they were my own.  I believed that the government should ensure that everyone had the same rights, that it should be responsible for the defense of the country, ensure everyone had access to healthcare and education including college.  I also believed in worker rights, although I did not know that was what it was called, I just knew that workers should be treated fairly.

 

The part about providing a college education hit home for me when I was a senior in high school.  One evening my mother said she wanted to talk with me, and we went out on the back porch for some privacy.  My mother asked me what my plans were for after I graduated?  I was not sure what exactly she was asking, and she explained that she wanted to know if I was planning on going to college or just join the workforce full time?  I talked with my mother about careers I was seriously considering and my goals but had not decided which college degree would serve me best and then asked her why she was asking?  My mother hesitated and seemed reluctant to tell me but she finally told me if I wanted to go to college she could help me but that she could only afford to send one of us to college and if I chose to go to college she wouldn’t be able to send my brother to college (he was graduating high school the year after me).

 

Without hesitation I told my mother to send my brother to college, he had better grades than me and between the two of us I thought he had the better chance.  I told her that I would get a full-time job and help her financially while my brother was in college, I could always get a college degree later.  I could see how bothered my mother was about needing to have this conversation so I tried to make her feel better, I explained that I didn’t mind because it was the responsibility/ duty of the older members of the family to help the younger succeed.  While I did not want my mother to feel bad about having that conversation with me, I can remember thinking that in a country as great as the U.S. was, she should have never had to have that conversation with one of her children.

 

Until now I hadn’t shared that story with a lot of people and those friends that knew this story couldn’t figure out how I became a Republican, especially because I was also from Pittsburgh and when I was living there the steel mills and unions were active and a part of life.  Well, that is the second part of the story I have rarely shared until now.  My family moved to Florida in 1972 and I had heard the stories that in Southern politics you were either Democrat or nothing.  I did not know if that were true, but it made no difference because I had long ago decided that I would register Democrat when I was of age.

 

Every quarter one of my high school years a counselor would call all the students that turned 18 to his office so they could complete a voter registration card.  When my time came, I was looking forward to registering, a group of us went to the counselor’s office and began to complete our cards.  In addition to my beliefs and coming from a “union town” this was just after Watergate and President Nixon’s resignation and pardon.  I proudly filled out my voter registration card and selected Democrat.  As I was signing my card and about to turn it into the counselor another student was handing in his card, the counselor stopped him and made an announcement to the group that we had better register as a Democrat otherwise he would not turn in our cards.  I tore up my registration card and asked for another one, he assumed that I had originally chose Republican.  I filled out a new card and he was smiling as I handed it to him, when he saw that I had chosen Republican the counselor got angry!  Before he could say or do anything, I dared him not to turn in my card.  I told him that if I didn’t receive my voter registration within the next month (that was how long it was taking students to receive their cards) I would be at the following School Board meeting and discuss some of his conduct that would not be very flattering to my school or the School Board.  About a month later I received my voter registration card, I was now a registered Republican.

 

I did not like some of what I witnessed growing up regarding law enforcement interaction with people, so I decided to join a police department and try to make a difference.  I also became active in my department’s union and later the Health Insurance Trust for officers and their families.  My beliefs haven’t changed a lot since I was growing up, I still believe that all should have access to healthcare and a college education if they want without their parent(s) having to have the conversation my mother had with me.  My problem with what politicians have put forth in recent years is the way they wanted to provide and pay for these things (these are topics for future posts).  Since becoming an adult I also have concerns about how the government spends and the resulting deficits.   I also grew up with the philosophy that as you succeed you should help others, as an adult I still believe that, society will be a better place if we help one another but that help needs to be sincere and not for a tax deduction.

 

I normally end my writings by asking "That’s my opinion, what’s yours” but instead I think I’ll end this by just saying that this is a brief explanation of beliefs, what drives my politics so now if you want to judge me or stick me with some label you can do so with a little knowledge.

 

Our Parents Were Correct

 I’m constantly reminded of a lesson our parents tried to teach us and until we all remember the moral to that lesson nothing will ever change for the better.

When Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016 many said that a replacement shouldn’t be nominated until the new President was elected in 8 1/12 months, the American people should have a say. That argument was a crock back then because the American people had a say in 2012 when President Obama was re-elected and while the election of a new President was taking place in 8/12 months there was still 11 months left in President Obama’s term.

Now people are arguing that President Trump shouldn’t make a nomination to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg because there are 44 days to the next Presidential election.  While that maybe true they are ignoring the fact that there are 122 days, approximately 4 1/2 months left in his term.

It was wrong for people to say President Obama shouldn’t nominate a replacement for Justice Scalia and it was wrong for Congress to block his performing his Constitutional duty of nominating that replacement. Just as it was wrong in 2016 it’s wrong now, Justice Ginsburg said as much when asked back in 2016.

I started this post referencing a lesson our parents tried to teach us, If your friend jumped off a cliff would you jump off a cliff?” (in some regions it was a bridge instead of a cliff)

If you don’t believe that lesson is relevant let me rephrase the sentiment, if you thought back in 2016 that President Obama should wait but now think President Trump should go ahead with a nomination or in 2016 you thought President Obama should go ahead and now that President Trump should wait do me a favor, stop claiming that the political party you support is better than the other because you’re demonstrating that their both the same!

Technology Has Become Our Humanity?

 Have you noticed how busy we all seem to be since the advent of the internet and social media, the smartphones so we can get on both? 

 

There was a time when we would go to work, then have family time and also socialize with friends.  By socialize I mean actually see them face to face, in person and communicate with our voice not our keyboard!  But now our idea of spending quality time with a friend is direct messaging, instant messaging, a text or video calling, we’ve lost that personal interaction.  We’ve created a new language with texting abbreviations but seem to have lost the ability to actually carry on a verbal conversation.

 

Don’t get me wrong I know there has been good come from the technology advances, those that aren’t able to get out because of health issues or not able to travel can still stay in touch with their loved ones but technology shouldn’t be a substitute for our humanity.  It seems that helping now is making a few clicks on an app instead of actually showing up in person, we express our “concern” now online instead of actually interacting, it’s emotionally safer for us.  Worse than that we use social media to hide, it used to be that words had consequences.  We used to be more cognizant that our words could have an emotional, negative impact on a person because we saw their facial expression or body language but now we can let go of our anger without a concern for others because it was done with a keyboard.

 

There used to be an expression that “action speaks louder than words”, but that is no longer valid, the modern saying should be “Posts are more important than actions”.  No matter what you do in life it doesn’t count and didn’t happen if you didn’t post about it on social media.  You can post about a wrong on social media and now a days that’s all you have to do; you are a social warrior!  Actually, stepping away from your keyboard and doing something doesn’t matter anymore, unless of course you record it and post it on social media.  We have come to a point that if it’s on the internet it must be true, as a society we’ve gone from my minds made up, don’t confuse me with facts to I saw it on the internet so I don’t need any facts.

 

I remember in 1999 people were told that come New Years 2000 all electronics may stop working, Y2K is what we called it.  People were concerned that if this were to happen life may get a little harder, it may take a little longer to do things manually, but we would survive.  If Y2K were to actually happen today do you think we could survive without our laptops or smartphones, could we actually perform life’s necessities?  Could we actually carry on a conversation using language instead of text abbreviations?  I doubt it.

 

Some of us used to joke that people were so mesmerized by texting that in the future detectives would not be able to conduct an interview.  In the future instead of speaking with a suspect you would have to give a suspect a device and then text back and forth.  Shortly before retiring from a police agency in 2007 I rejected an arrest affidavit because the entire narrative was written in all texting abbreviations, as the officer was rewriting that affidavit suddenly that joke wasn’t funny anymore, it had become a reality!

Will the pendulum continue moving further away or will it return to the center where technology is simply an aide and not a controlling part of our lives?  I hope so but have my doubts unless someone develops a humanity app.

 

That’s my opinion, what’s yours

 

 

 

 

Thoughts after the death of George Floyd (part 1)

I wanted to take a few moments to write and share a few thoughts as a former law enforcement officer over the death of George Floyd while he was in the custody of the Minneapolis Police Department.

Many are outraged and disgusted by Mr. Floyd’s death which they first learned about when cell phone videos were shared on social media.  There is one group of people that are outraged by the death that many will not believe, that is the group of good law enforcement officers.  Everyone that I know, including active and retired law enforcement officers were outraged when they saw the video.  Outraged at the needless loss of life, not the fact that the death was video recorded as some may claim. 

I was a law enforcement officer for 38 years, beginning my career in Miami in 1981 in the aftermath of what became known at the McDuffie riots and the Mariel Boatlift.  The 1980 riots in Miami became known as the McDuffie riots because it was sparked after officers were acquitted of beating Arthur McDuffie to death.  During my career I worked several riots, numerous violent incidents including Police involved shootings, had numerous physical and violent confrontations with suspects.  It has always been my belief that in a violent encounter you do everything you can to subdue the person and take them into custody.  The most important part of that belief is that when the person stops resisting, stops fighting, you stop and at that point it is your obligation to protect that suspect’s life.  As law enforcement officers we take an oath and have a duty to protect life and property, that includes the suspects we arrest.  Some may think that I am just saying that now because of the anger being expressed towards law enforcement, however, I demonstrated that early and throughout my 38-year career.  This philosophy that I had is not an isolated one, I had a lot of good mentors when I was a rookie officer and they felt the same as I.

I watched a cell phone video of the incident involving Mr. Floyd, the video started after he was handcuffed and on the ground with the officer kneeling down with a knee pressed against Mr. Floyd’s neck.  The video was just over 10 minutes long but after approximately six minutes I stopped the video.  I had to stop the video because I was pissed (angry or outraged just does not accurately describe how I felt) and grew more pissed with each passing minute as I watched.

When the video begins George Floyd is handcuffed and laying on the ground, on his stomach with his head turned to the side.  He is pleading with the officers, saying that he can’t breathe but he is not resisting.  A person in the background is telling Mr. Floyd that he should have just got in the car, it appears based on this person’s comments that prior to the video starting there was an attempt to place Mr. Floyd in the police vehicle.  The person in the background keeps urging Mr. Floyd to just get in the car (referring to the police vehicle), he responds that he can’t because they’re on his neck and then pleads with the officers again telling them that he can’t breathe.  Then Mr. Floyd complains of pain saying that his arms, legs and neck hurt, he hurts all over and can’t breathe.

At approximately three minutes Mr. Floyd stops speaking, occasionally you will see his shoulder move.  Less than a minute after he stopped speaking there is no movement or sound from Mr. Floyd and yet there is no change in the officer’s actions, including the officer with his knee on Floyd’s neck. No officer in view checks Mr. Floyd’s vital signs, no one checks his neck for a pulse or checks to see if he is taking in air or exhaling.  A bystander that had been complaining to the officer about his knee being on Mr. Floyd’s neck begins to plead with the officers to check on Mr. Floyd because he is non responsive, others begin to echo the pleas to check on Mr. Floyd and his vital signs because he wasn’t moving.  As I mentioned, as I watched this I was angry and grew more angry as I watched the video, two minutes had gone by since Mr. Floyd became non responsive and no signs of inhaling or exhaling yet no officer would check on him.  No officer, including the officer with his knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck did anything to assist or even check on Mr. Floyd.  No concern was shown for Mr. Floyd’s well being but an officer kept telling the people pleading for the officers to check on and help Mr. Floyd to get back and apparently reached for his “pepper spray” (you can hear one of the bystanders telling the others he had is pepper spray).

It was at that point that I had to stop the video because of the level of my anger.  Anger because here was a subject in custody, complaining about not being able to breathe and then became nonresponsive and no officer near him seemed concerned.  There was no indication that any of the officers not in view were attempting to render aid to Mr. Floyd either.

As I am writing this, violent protests are taking place in a number of cities around the country and I know that with emotions as raw as they are right now many don’t want to hear or believe that law enforcement officers and their families are angered, outraged, or like me pissed about what happened.  The vast majority of officers took their oath of office seriously and believe in the phrase protect and serve.  They wish they had been there and have been able to intercede, render aid and call for paramedics to save Mr. Floyd’s life.  Those of us that have been in law enforcement for a long time or retired also feel a sense of frustration knowing what the newer or active officers will have to endure to try and gain back any trust of their community.  In the case of my career with the City of Miami it took decades for the police department to regain some trust, some but not completely.

When a person of color, man or woman, loses their life as the result of an encounter with law enforcement it hurts all persons who want peace and strive for our community, our country to live up to the ideal that we are all created equal.  To some that read this they may think that these are just words or my attempt at being politically correct and I realize that there is nothing I can do to convince you otherwise.  All I can do is try to lead by example and hope that once the anger eases people will see that the words of law enforcement officers expressing their outrage are sincere.  While times like this are hard on all officers I am also hopeful that once the anger eases people will realize how much more difficult these times are on minority officers.  It is harder on these officers because after an incident such as this civic leader and the community will insist that if there were more officers of the same race or ethnicity patrolling the neighborhoods these deaths would not occur. 

A person becomes a police officer because they want to make a difference and be a catalyst for change, for improving their neighborhood.  Then what happens, they graduate the police academy and begin patrolling the streets only to find themselves being called a traitor to their people a traitor to their race!  Some find that after they put on the badge people treat them differently than before and mistrust them, unfortunately in some cases even family members turn on them. 

When I worked patrol as a rookie it was not unusual for an African American officer to contact me on the radio and ask me to come by their call and being told when I arrived that the African American citizen that called the police was refusing to speak with the African American officer.  When I interviewed the citizen at some point (a lot of times at the beginning of the conversation) I would be told that they “didn’t trust black officers.”  I still remember how surprised I was the first time I encountered this.  Here I had an elderly black woman telling me that she refused to speak with a black officer because she did not trust him!!  I was dismayed and it took a few minutes after I left to recover. When I was a Sergeant in Patrol when Elian Gonzalez was taken by Federal agents and given to his father and then returned to Cuba I had Latin officers who were experiencing family members mistrusting them because they were a Miami Police Officer.  Friends and neighbors looked upon them as the enemy.  Throughout my career I kept wondering what we as a department and me as a member of the police department could do to change this divide, there had to be more that could be done.  Now that I am retired, I wonder what I can do as a citizen.

I became an officer to try and help people, to try and make a difference.  I joined the police department because I believed that instead of just complaining about a problem you should try to do something about it.  Although it may sound naïve, or cliché that is why I joined and why many join even today!

I know there are frustrations and anger because people feel that despite all the technological advances, despite the advances in persons of color holding political office and gaining political power nothing has really changed.  I just hope that once some time has past people realize that you do not have to be of a certain racial group to be outraged by the death of George Floyd.  Hopefully, people will realize that law enforcement officers are also outraged, officers want all people to have trust in their police.  Officers know that trust is earned, and they want to be given a chance to show that they are deserving of trust.  Officers also want a police agency that people can be proud of and feel comfortable calling for help when in need.

People deserve the benefit of the doubt and to have their life respected and protected, even someone that is accused of a crime like George Floyd.  Anger blinds people to so much and helps spread hatred and racism.  I am not saying that people should not be angry at the death of George Floyd, I am saying we should not allow this anger to prevent us from making changes that benefit all.  Good law enforcement officers are not traitors to their race, they are not traitors to their community, they are outraged at the death of George Floyd and want bad cops off the force.  Good cops need help from the community they serve to rid the law enforcement profession of people that do not respect and defend the rights and life of all people.  When the community and its good officers work together there is nothing that cannot be accomplished!

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours?

(I am drafting a second part with a general perspective and will post as soon as I can)

Peace Officers Memorial Day and Police Week

Normally in the month of May law enforcement agencies around the nation would be holding memorial services honoring their officers that have made the ultimate sacrifice by giving their life in the performance of their duty.  There would be a national remembrance on the lawn of the U.S. Capital on May 15th, this would be preceded by a candlelight vigil at the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial on May 13th. However, because of the Covid-19 Pandemic the country is currently dealing with many of these services may not take place this year, including the national service which was canceled (a video salute will be issued in it's place and officers for 2019 and 2020 will be honored next year).

Over the past several years law enforcement agencies have had a large turnover of officers and sometimes in the transition we lose some of our historical information. I have had new officers and citizens ask me why police memorials are held in May? I wrote about Florida's Law Enforcement Service back in 2011 and thought I would do another brief article to explain why these services are held during the month of May. 

On October 1, 1962 Congress passed a joint resolution (76 Stat.676) requesting that the President of the United States designate May 15th as Peace Officers Memorial Day. As a result of that joint resolution, on May 4, 1963 President John F. Kennedy issued a Presidential Proclamation, #3537, designating May 15th of each year as Peace Officers Memorial Day and the calendar week in which May 15th falls as Police Week.

Law Enforcement Agencies try to hold their services during the month of May on dates that won't conflict with the national service so that the survivors will be able to attend the local and national service honoring their loved one. It also allows for the friends and coworkers to be able to attend and show support for the survivors and each other.  As well as honoring those that gave their life in the performance of their duty the previous year it is a way of ensuring that those that made the ultimate sacrifice in the past are not forgotten.

I will close by asking that on May 15th we all stop for a moment to remember all the Peace Officers that went to work one day and never returned home to their loved ones.

Technology of This Millennium, Is It Worth It?

Back in 1999 we were looking forward to the new millennium with both fear and optimism! 

Fear was because we were told that when the clocks struck midnight (00:00) on January 1^st, 2000 all electronics were going to stop working, the electrical grids would shut down, no access to bank accounts (account info would be lost) transportation would fail, nothing would work because the internal clocks couldn’t comprehend the date and time being al zeros, 00:00 hours the year 00.  If none of that happened there was still the fear of the unknown, but that fear of the unknown was also exciting and a cause for optimism.

 Optimism because if the world did not shut down technology was progressing and what was once just a dream would become a possibility.  Back in 1999 most people used the internet for email communications, AOL was what people used for emails, cell phones were primarily just for calls and there were no “smartphones”.  We saw the future as helping enhance our ability to perform work, to enhance our humanity and better enable our ability to help others.  We saw so many possibilities to make life easier and more productive, technology was going to be a time savor for us.

Well, we survived New Years Eve of December 31, 1999, the world did not crash, and we went on about our lives, technological changes continued as well.  We could look up information via the internet instead of the set of Encyclopedias your mother bought for you as a child or by cashing in her Green Stamps (anyone remember going to the Green Stamp store).  You no longer had to go to the library to do research of to get a book to read, you could download an “E-book” to read.  Then came Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, Parler and other social media platforms to keep in touch with one another or reconnect with long lost friends.  You no longer needed to write a letter or post card, buy stamps and go to the post office, all you do now is a few clicks on a keyboard to send an email or text message (before this millennium the only message you received on your phone was a voice mail if you had the latest mobile phone).

It used to be that on payday you had to go to the bank to cash your paycheck, if the bank was closed you had to go to the grocery store where you had check cashing privileges to get cash.  Now you just go to the ATM to get cash, use direct deposit for your paycheck, checks have gone the way of the telephone, both are obsolete and nearly nonexistent anymore.  Life has certainly gotten easier for financial transactions, you can shop online for almost anything including groceries, life has got easier but has the cost been worth it?

A part of the cost has been a lack of personal face to face interaction with others.  Oral communications is a skill, carrying on a conversation and being able to see the other person’s reaction, their body language so you can immediately know if they understood what you said or it’s meaning.  It seems that we have also lost our ability to interact with others especially if they have a different point of view.  It used to be that if someone had a different opinion, we could discuss our differences, we could engage one another and learn why each had the opinion they did, if someone had a different opinion we could still get along.  We used to engage each other in a dialog and learn why they thought what they did without hatred.  We used to be able to speak with one another not at one another but not anymore.

Now if someone does not agree with you, they do not have a different opinion, they are the enemy, they are not worth talking to.  Now with social media we do not have to think before expounding on our point of view, worse than that we seem to believe that if we post something social media we can’t or shouldn’t be held accountable for our actions.

By engaging someone in a conversation you got to develop a rapport, learn about each other and in many cases even though you may be a member of a different political party or religion you became friends.  We used to judge and accept people based on the total person but that seems to have gone the way of the home phone.  We used to believe that all people should be treated the same, should be able to interact with others.  We used to be proud of our ethnicity, our heritage as well as that of others.  But in recent years we have seen students on college campuses demand that others be excluded, although they did not use the specific wording and may not have realized it these students have been expressing that they prefer separate but equal.  We used to praise and admire someone that achieved their goal but often now we demand to know why him or her!  An achievement by another used to be a motivator, an incentive to work a little harder to achieve your goal, not seen as a reason to dislike or hate another.

I guess what I’m really asking is; was our compassion, our humanity, our being a good neighbor really a justifiable price for the technological advances this millennium has produced so far?  I for one don’t think so!  Hopefully instead of being the full price we must pay for technology; these virtues will just be a deposit that we get back at some point.  So far when you look at history every time there has been an advancement in technology it has brought out some bad traits in society  but after society has become accustomed to the technological changes it reverts back to those positive traits.  I am hoping that just as in the past this is a phase and that history will repeat itself.

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours

Brief update

Back in December I posted that I’d be back soon, as soon as I dealt with some personal/ family issues.  I recently had someone ask if I would be posting again anytime soon.

Those issues that I referenced in my December post was that my partner/ better half had suffered a medical issue requiring surgery and physical therapy.

She is progressing well and has reached a point that she wants me to start doing some of my own things again, some of the things I enjoy (like writing).  As a result I’ve begun paying more attention to current events and subjects that I’m interested in writing about.  I have begun drafting some ideas and should have an article up soon.