Remember that video about police complain forms in FL?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You know

when you watch the TV show "COPS" and they play that song where the chorus is "Bad Boys" over and over? I'm starting to wonder who that's about....
CT
 
Shield259

Quote I also believe firmly that if someone wants to file a complaint it should be in person, signed, and sworn. If I make an arrest I have to swear to everything I say, if it is found to be false I will be fired at best imprisoned at worst. When I swear to an affidavit and arrest you I have to go on the stand and YOU have the right to question me face to face in court.Therefore if you wish to make a complaint that could subject me to the loss of my job, pay, and freedom, why should you not have to abide by the same standards I do. Being able to file nameless faceless complaints and have them acted on without questioning is unfair.


Guess what, if the public rules of the departments do allow the people to fill them out anonymously, then those are the rules. Any attempt by an officer to circumvent this is unprofessional. I have held jobs where I could be filed against anonymously. Guess what, If it is part of the rules you have to abide by for your job, either quit or get the rules changed. Or are you above rules?

You signed up for a job where you have to appear in court all the time and be questioned, the majority of us did not. We dont have to abide by the same standards when filing a report, If you dont like it, quit. Just on that note, I do believe that filing a false official statement is a crime, and that anonomous complaints probably dont hold much weight.

The ability to file a complaint on an officer is a way to air grievences and bad behavior of LEO's, think of it as a safety valve. Removing a persons ability to file a complaint against LEO's might end up with someone resolving their issues in a way that would be detrimental for all concerned.
 
Jeff,

Let us assume, for the sake of arguement, that the videos are edited to make the cops shown look bad.

Do you find it acceptable for the police to use such behavior for a man who might be ride, but not criminal? (Do note, I am saying he might be rude for the sake of arguement. Nothing in the tapes hinted towards rudeness.)

On to those medical professionals and insurance agencies keeping their own lists.

Can either of those groups bring down the force of law the way police can? Also, are these groups keeping PRIVATE lists, or are they sending out this information widely where anyone can view it?

Now, lastly, we hit what bugs me the most about the whole thing.

Do you honestly find it acceptable for a policemans union (keep in mind the powers police hold in this country) to send out to their members the home address, date of birth and drivers license number of a man under the form of a BOLO?

What if the BOLO was not because he was a 'troublemaker', but say, because he owned guns, and we need to watch out for this guy, because only 'we' should own guns? After all, a union must protect its membership. Would that be acceptable to you?
 
Jeff White said:
medical professionals and insurance companies keeping lists of those who file malpractice claims

I'm surprised that this was not pointed out earlier. I'm in a medical profession; my wife is in a medical profession. I personally worked with a number of health insurance companies. A single company or an individual physician probably does keep records of claims against them. However, no physician group, whether local, state or national, tracks or disseminates such data. I needed such information for my research. It doesn't exist. Moreover, it is illegal even to list the names of patients. Identifying them as such would be a HIPPA violation.

I personally think that police union acted legally but unethically
 
They used to call this Yellow Journalism

Imagine, if you will, the same reporter entered the police departments with a camera crew, transparently filming the encounter between the reporter and the desk LEO. Knowing that the cameras were rolling, would an LEO resort to intimidating behavior? Not if he wants to risk suspension, disciplinary action, or lose his job. But when the cameras are concealed or unavailable, why is it the few bad apples in the police department will resort to intimidating tactics while most LEOs are above reproach?
 
Somekid said;
Let us assume, for the sake of arguement, that the videos are edited to make the cops shown look bad.

Do you find it acceptable for the police to use such behavior for a man who might be ride, but not criminal? (Do note, I am saying he might be rude for the sake of arguement. Nothing in the tapes hinted towards rudeness.)

I never once said that the behavior of all the officers was acceptable. I don't believe that we saw the complete encounter. It's very easy to edit a tape to show anything you want to show. And there are no checks and balances on news organizations. They are not required to keep master tapes of interviews.

On to those medical professionals and insurance agencies keeping their own lists.

Can either of those groups bring down the force of law the way police can? Also, are these groups keeping PRIVATE lists, or are they sending out this information widely where anyone can view it?

The Police Benefit Association is a private group. It is not a police department and it probably has members who are police employees and who aren't sworn, such as telecommunicators who have no peace officer powers. It cannot bring the force of law down on anyone. Again, they published this information on their website. I have no idea if their website is password protected. It doesn't matter. It's not like they bought a banner ad on the Yahoo start page. The so called victim didn't even see the information on the website. Another reporter found the information printed in hard copy in a police station.

Do you honestly find it acceptable for a policemans union (keep in mind the powers police hold in this country) to send out to their members the home address, date of birth and drivers license number of a man under the form of a BOLO?

Yes I do find it acceptable. It is just as acceptable as a store owner posting a list of people who write bad checks (often those lists contain addresses and other identifying information) next to the cash register or bar owners keeping lists of false IDs. The fact that police officers are given certain powers does not mean they aren't as entitled to know about someone who will try to force a confrontation with then as a convenience store clerk is to know who will probably write them a bad check.

What if the BOLO was not because he was a 'troublemaker', but say, because he owned guns, and we need to watch out for this guy, because only 'we' should own guns? After all, a union must protect its membership. Would that be acceptable to you?

But the BOLO didn't say that. It said to watch out for this guy because he will try to force you into a compromising position. That's a fair warning in my book. If you want to start another thread about a union keeping lists of gun owners, you're free to. However it's not material to this discussion.

mcg-doc, it's a pretty common practice around here where the number of malpractice suits are driving physicians out of the area. I don't know that there is a single consolidated list, but the lists exist just as you stated through individual providers and insurance companies.

Imagine, if you will, the same reporter entered the police departments with a camera crew, transparently filming the encounter between the reporter and the desk LEO. Knowing that the cameras were rolling, would an LEO resort to intimidating behavior?

I'm not against a hidden camera. I am against the reporter forcing a confrontation in order to get the appropriate response. If the reporter had acted that way in a private business, refusing to be helped, and acting like he was fixated on something that didn't exist, they probably would have called the police to remove him.

A fair report would have went something like this:

reporter: I'd like to make a complaint about an officer, do you have a form?

Desk Officer: No, but I would be glad to help you with your complaint.

reporter: No, I don't want to talk to an officer I just want to fill out a form.

Desk Officer: You have to speak to an officer to file a complaint.

reporter: Ok, thanks....turns and leaves.

reporter (on air): The International Association of Chiefs of Police recommends that police departments have complaint forms available to the public. Our undercover crew went out and visited locla police stations today and only three area police departments have forms.


Of course you don't win an Emmy with a report like that. Your collegues don't reward you for your cutting edge investigative reporting, and no one in the audience really cares about the issue. So instead you go out with your under cover camera crew and try to create interesting video. The entire community will be concerned about the jack booted thugs sitting behind desks in our police stations, so let's see how far we can push them. And I'd be really interested in seeing all of the video of a couple of the confrontations.

The reporter had an agenda and went out and created a story to prove it. Yellow Journalism. And judging by the responses in the two threads on this subject, he succeeded.

Jeff
 
Jeff White said:
It is just as acceptable as a store owner posting a list of people who write bad checks (often those lists contain addresses and other identifying information) next to the cash register or bar owners keeping lists of false IDs.

However, neither the store nor the bar owners disseminate this information among the local towns people or other business owners. Moreover, fake ID’s and bad checks are illegal. Complaining about the police is not.

it's a pretty common practice around here where the number of malpractice suits are driving physicians out of the area. I don't know that there is a single consolidated list, but the lists exist just as you stated through individual providers and insurance companies.

I would really like to get my hands on such list if it exists. Please, PM or e-mail me the information on how I can obtain the list or whose position you have seen it in. Such information is not available to me locally. May be things are different in Illinois.
 
The union did not disseminate the information to the local people either. It was found, on paper in a police station.

Complaining about the police is not illegal. But everyone, including the police has a right to protect themselves against people who would try to cause trouble.

I would really like to get my hands on such list if it exists. Please, PM or e-mail me the information on how I can obtain the list or whose position you have seen it in. Such information is not available to me locally. May be things are different in Illinois.

Give me a day or so to get you a contact number. I'll have to make some calls.

Jeff
 
John,
The internet is not a secure place. There are already enough public records about all of us available online that anyone with the interest and sometimes a little bit of cash to pay an information clearing house can find out just about any public information they want to.

Why is it some kind of terrible invasion of privacy for a union to post a warning like that, but it's not an invasion of privacy for any of the several online directories to post home addresses, phone numbers and even have a handy link to bring up a map to someones house on the page?

The information was published on a website that was probably only frequented by members of the union, and probably not a majority of them.

Perhaps we should just shut the internet down?

Jeff
 
Oringinally Posted by: JohnBT
I don't think posting someone's address on the web is something to be proud of, especially when you've got a beef with them.

I don't think it's right when someone does it to a police officer and I don't think it's right when they do it to someone.

John

True but the fact is that officers are immune to a lot of these efforts and it is illegal in some states to publish their personal information.

The fact is that the officers are acting childish and are abusing their power. I hope that the communities in question where the officers acted like children are calling for some firings and a loss of pension.
 
Oringinally Posted by: JohnBT
I don't think posting someone's address on the web is something to be proud of, especially when you've got a beef with them.

I don't think it's right when someone does it to a police officer and I don't think it's right when they do it to someone.

John

True but the fact is that officers are immune to a lot of these efforts and it is illegal in some states to publish their personal information.

The fact is that the officers are acting childish and are abusing their power. I hope that the communities in question where the officers acted like children are calling for some firings and a loss of pension.
 
Jeff, I have to say in all honesty that I think you are circling the wagons here. You keep saying that this BOLO was to alert officers so they could protect themselves if they ever encountered this reporter. That sounds nice and innocent, but I'm afraid I'm simply not willing to accept or believe that the purpose of the BOLO wasn't to let officers know whose car to subject to a bit of "extra attention" if they saw it on the streets.

And I think deep in your heart of hearts you know that to be true, as well.
 
Hawkmoon said;

I'm afraid I'm simply not willing to accept or believe that the purpose of the BOLO wasn't to let officers know whose car to subject to a bit of "extra attention" if they saw it on the streets.

If they wanted to let everyone know whose car to single out, why didn't they post any vehicle information? If this is as evil as you think it is, why didn't the BOLO say drives a red Toyota or whatever? What vehicles a person owns is very easy to come up with if, as you say someone wanted to misuse the computer system to set this guy up.

And I think deep in your heart of hearts you know that to be true, as well.

Nope. You aren't thinking like a cop. A member of the media, no matter what kind of a pain in the butt he was, is not the kind of person you'd want to harrass. The old saying about never picking a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel applies here. If a reporter (who already showed an anti-police bias) felt he was being harrassed, he'd certainly retaliate on the air and the officer and department would lose in the court of public opinion.

Jeff
 
Broward County Chapter of the PBA backs down, revises BOLO

An excerpt from the article:

The Webster's release of Kirsch's personal data is an obvious case of illegal harassment, says Alan Rosenthal, attorney for CBS 4, including the violation of state and federal laws prohibiting the disclosure of motor vehicle record data.

On Friday, March 10, Rosenthal delivered a cease-and-desist letter to the Broward County Chapter of the PBA in Fort Lauderdale, demanding that distribution of the BOLO stop and it be removed from the Website by 5:00 p.m. (which it was, with an hour to spare).

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/Issues/2006-03-23/news/metro.html

Another excerpt:

Also named in the BOLO was Greg Slate, a Police Complaint Center investigator based in Maryland. What worries him about South Florida cops, he says, is that "there's so much centralized power and no oversight. And there's a real maturity issue with some of these guys."

He's referring to the scene at the Sea Ranch station, in which one officer, unaware he was on camera, demanded Slate's driver's license. "And I'm doing everything in my power to cooperate," explained Slate. Footage shows an officer shouting at Slate, as if trying to provoke Slate to make a move he would likely regret. "You can see me try to hand it to him. At one point our hands are about three inches apart, and he's demanding that I move it over. If someone's going to do that over some minor issue, then what would they do in a real high-pressure situation where somebody's life is on the line?"

In any case, police appear to have gotten the message. After the series aired, Slate found that all but one station stocked complaint forms. The Pembroke Pines Police Department was the exception.
 
May I ask both sides to narrow the discussion?

I can understand the union posting the individual's name and profession and stating "look out for this guy: investigative journalist, he may set you up." But what about the home address part? Why was that necessary?
 
The text of the entire article, in case the link goes bad:

It was a hidden-camera exposé that made police departments look bad. In conjunction with an independent watchdog group called the Police Complaint Center, WFOS-TV CBS 4 reporter Mike Kirsch presented remarkable footage of what happens when a civilian tries to file a complaint against a police officer in South Florida.

At cop shop after cop shop, undercover investigators were met with intimidation. In Lauderhill an officer was hostile and threatening, taunting a man who simply asked for a complaint form. A Sea Ranch officer threatened to ticket a complainant's car for "improper backing." Others simply refused to hand over a form, or denied they existed.

The footage reinforced every stereotype about arrogant and uncooperative cops.

Kirsch presented the incriminating footage to Miami Police Chief John Timoney, BSO Sheriff Ken Jenne, and other law enforcement honchos. Timoney, whose station was the only one to pass the undercover test by handing over a complaint form, asserted that any police chief who didn't make a form available should be fired. Jenne, meanwhile, looked stunned by some of Kirsch's tough questions.

Some officers had another reaction. By the time Kirsch's series aired the first week of February, the Broward County Police Benevolent Association decided to do something.

It went after Kirsch.

On the BCPBA's Website, a flashing icon alerted viewers to a BOLO — "be on the lookout" — which, when clicked, led to a warning: "Channel 4 News is ... setting up officers and instigating confrontations, then filing complaints with the various police departments." Also posted was Kirsch's personal information: his date of birth, home address, and driver's license number. The bulletin was distributed to individual stations in each municipality.

"I've been in far more dangerous circumstances," says Kirsch, who has filed stories from Iraq and Afghanistan and has won numerous awards for his work. "But when you're in a civil society like the U.S. [and] you do a story on police officers and you have them start threatening you...."

Years ago in Cicero, Illinois, Kirsch says he was pinned against his car by officers he was investigating, and he says the recent events brought back the same feeling.

"I thought it was harassment," he says of the BOLO bulletin. "It's different now because I have a wife and child. I told my wife to grow eyes in the back of her head. She was kind of concerned about it."

The Webster's release of Kirsch's personal data is an obvious case of illegal harassment, says Alan Rosenthal, attorney for CBS 4, including the violation of state and federal laws prohibiting the disclosure of motor vehicle record data.

On Friday, March 10, Rosenthal delivered a cease-and-desist letter to the Broward County Chapter of the PBA in Fort Lauderdale, demanding that distribution of the BOLO stop and it be removed from the Website by 5:00 p.m. (which it was, with an hour to spare).

Dick Brickman, president of Broward's PBA, sounded less than apologetic about posting the BOLO. "I don't think it went too far," he said last week. "We're about to put it back on the Website, but we're taking certain information off. I've been advised by our legal staff not to put it up there."

For Brickman, a retired police officer, Kirsch's credentials mean little. "These people call themselves journalists," he seethed, "but they're not reporting the news, they're creating the news." Brickman says he issued the BOLO because "we wanted to alert our members that these people were out there trying to make news by setting them up."

After the CBS 4 report aired, police reacted angrily. "Mike D.," a self-described "disgusted police officer," wrote a scathing e-mail to flacops.com, a statewide portal for law enforcement news.

"Reporters like Mike Kirsch don't care about news," he wrote. "They care about controversy, creating a villain, shock value, and ratings."

Adds Brickman: "Who cares whether you have a form or not? I'd have taken five minutes to listen to them and realized it was just a bunch of BS. I think the police department should go after them for making a false police report!"

Also named in the BOLO was Greg Slate, a Police Complaint Center investigator based in Maryland. What worries him about South Florida cops, he says, is that "there's so much centralized power and no oversight. And there's a real maturity issue with some of these guys."

He's referring to the scene at the Sea Ranch station, in which one officer, unaware he was on camera, demanded Slate's driver's license. "And I'm doing everything in my power to cooperate," explained Slate. Footage shows an officer shouting at Slate, as if trying to provoke Slate to make a move he would likely regret. "You can see me try to hand it to him. At one point our hands are about three inches apart, and he's demanding that I move it over. If someone's going to do that over some minor issue, then what would they do in a real high-pressure situation where somebody's life is on the line?"

In any case, police appear to have gotten the message. After the series aired, Slate found that all but one station stocked complaint forms. The Pembroke Pines Police Department was the exception.

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/Issues/2006-03-23/news/metro.html
 
If citizens want to be greeted with tea and cookies when filing an IA complaint, they need to stop filing the lies, the retaliation, and the exaggerations complaints first.

FLACops.com
Wednesday, March 15, 2006


This quote clearly shows the poor attitude of some in the law enforcement towards the citizens. Unfortunately, it supports the premise of the journalist.
 
Kirsch first learned about the BOLO from a colleague who saw the flier in a stack of BOLOs at a local police station. New Times reporter Jeff Stratton wrote about the BOLO last week.
The frequently-repeated claim that the Police Officer's Union is solely responsible for this looks pretty absurd when you see where the document was being distributed.

I'm generally a defender of law enforcement types, but not in this case. This type of crap crosses any reasonable line of professional behavior, and simply can't be condoned or excused.
 
Sorry, just indefensible, all rationalizations to the contrary. Solely an attempt to intimidate. Thuggish, no matter who 'authorized' it.

I hope the reporters in this case watch their backs -- don't stop for blue/red lights in a deserted area, drive to an area with lights and people before stopping, etc. Make sure they have all their licenses/permits/etc. up to date. Don't even think about drinking in public, or smoking a little weed at home. Be prepared to have their taxes audited. If they have any skeletons in the closet, best to talk about it with family now, before it appears in a paper somewhere.

It would be best not to be alone -- ever.

I agree with Jeff that it would make no sense to poke that ol' beast that buys ink by the gallon, but then it made no sense to provoke this in the first place by trying to intimidate the news people. Some cops may try to harass these reporters -- as we can see from the behaviour of some cops in this affair so far, some cops are not the sharpest knives in the drawer.

And, I don't think for a second that Jeff would have posted that information about the reporter in the first place -- anyone with such an idea would have probably been given a "WHAT! are you NUTS?" from him.

Which is how the idea SHOULD have been treated in Florida.
 
John White

your right, a fair report would have gone somewhat like this.
A fair report would have went something like this:

reporter: I'd like to make a complaint about an officer, do you have a form?

Desk Officer: No, but I would be glad to help you with your complaint.

reporter: No, I don't want to talk to an officer I just want to fill out a form.

Desk Officer: You have to speak to an officer to file a complaint.

reporter: Ok, thanks....turns and leaves.

It didnt. Why didnt any of the officers say they didnt have any complaint forms. Actually IIRC one PD said that, and it was the end of the video there. The news at that PD was that they had no complaint forms.

Instead we have the immediate mode change on the part of the policemen to "You have to tell me/desk sergeant what is going out before I will let you fill out a complaint" leading to the expectation that there are complaint forms, just the police officer aint letting the reporter have one before he finds out whats going on, or he wants to let another officer get into the reporter's business before he files a complaint. Then we have the threatening of ticketing and demands for ID because he is trying to file a complaint which was obvious harrassment.

The story was the reactions of the police to the reporter asking for a complaint form. Asking for a complaint form even after the policeman refuses to give you one is not provoking an officer, nor would a reasonable person find it so. If a person in any other job had acted half as badly as those policemen, they would have been fired as soon as the report aired. Again if I or any other civilian had initiated a confrontation, brandished a weapon and dared that same reporter to take a step forward all in response to a request for a complaint form, we would probably be in jail.
 
Well, a few other posters mentioned it... I'd just like to say it again:

If there is nothing wrong (legally and ethically) with posting the reporter's personal information on a (public) website, then there should be nothing wrong with posting police officer's information on a (public) website.

We're all citizens, right?

Maybe a "Be wary of this officer" (BWOTO) list?

What's good for the goose is what's good for the gander, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top