|
|
Post by corner on Jul 8, 2009 20:00:05 GMT -5
|
|
boomer
Mild Pushover
Posts: 128 
|
Post by boomer on Jul 9, 2009 9:45:05 GMT -5
I don't think you did anything wrong Corner. Maybe I could have made a diferentiation between the bad eggs and the good. That's another problem with the tarnishing of LE around these parts. There are many great LEOs in our midst, and I'll be the first one to say so, but they TOO are suffering the damage from the known bad apples. I can no longer use the advice of my father and mother who would tell me to respect all LEOs. Now, I have to watch and make that judgement after seeing who we are dealing with case-by-case.
It has happened too many times that I have seen the bad apples in action unprovoked just destroying people. I have little faith in the justice system around here it has become it's own punchline. That does not equate to an automatic dismissal of ALL LEOs. I'm just saying that I prefer to watch and see before I automatically trust anyone, badge or not.
Locally, it seems the Officers of our courts, the Judges and the DA/ADAs are off the deep end with their priorities. Priorities that don't seem aligned with public calm anymore. They cost too much with all that equipment, they prejudge the average civilian too much, and God forbid they make the slightest mistake, they go to pathetically transparent extremes to keep the cracked facade standing, as we see here in the subject title for this thread.
I would shocked speechless if just once one of these people came up and said: "Whoops!" We screwed up! Here's why and how it happened."
Honest, how can you resent someone who admits the mistake and sees it gets rectified? I can't and I'm one of the most distrustful!
Somewhere along the line, the Justice guys and the LEOs tried to become these "Terminators" of crime. Efficient and perfect. At least that seemed like it was the goal. The reality is somewhat short of that, what with the bad apples running about screwing that up, and a whole LE industry coming to NEED the money generated form traffic gauntlets and all this new way of doing LE. That accompanied by the above-mentioned "us & them" attitude just makes a sticky sociatal problem even stickier! A betrayal from a friend of peace and order hurts much worse than a betrayal from a stranger (i.e. a criminal). It leaves the average person feeling abandoned targeted and alone.
That being said, Corner, I should say that it bothers me that after all you have done for law and order that you say you have to arm yourself to even mow your lawn. My brother, a "convict" read that and was irritated. He said that most cons respected their POs and would probably help in a situation where a LEO was being harassed or harmed because not all of them bought into the Us & Them thing. His PO died about 8 years ago and he was quite bothered by the injustice of a guy working in the high-stress environment only to die very shortly into his retirement. He wanted to go to the POs service but did not because he felt he'd be harassed and ridiculed for going.
This is the crux of the problem and why I felt compelled to write: Even people who have been wronged by a cop or two don't feel right holding ALL LE responsible for the damage or wrongs of so few. THAT is why a LEO that screws up should be punished without deference, the damage goes far beyond the local wrong. THAT is why this DA and the Troopers shouldn't be seen to be protecting these guys and hiding the evidence from the public. The damage goes too far and creates distrust and alienation from the community they try so hard to protect.
If you remember I wrote about losing my younger brother to DWI when we were young. I came upon the scene very shortly after and it wasn't something you'd like me to describe. I don't like DWIs obviously, but I don't go too far overboard when I see it in the paper or even in this Sullivan case. Even if the guy was a prick like so many seem to feel, I can't condemn him totally as a human being. It happens.
The enraging thing is to see how far LE goes to keep promoting that "Terminator" personna or image. It's fake, it's not what society needs and gets a little thin in situations like this, where we see how far they go to cover their butts. From what we hear, Sullivan will be punished and will be allowed to take his (rightful?) pension. That's all. No-one wants to see the guy strung from a tree, we just want to know he was punished by the same yardstick everyone else is held to. When he's not, don't be suprised when all LEOs take the collective hit.
Like everyone here I'll be watching the outcome of this with heightened interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by gearofzanzibar on Jul 9, 2009 11:20:04 GMT -5
Maybe I could have made a diferentiation between the bad eggs and the good. That's another problem with the tarnishing of LE around these parts. There are many great LEOs in our midst, and I'll be the first one to say so, but they TOO are suffering the damage from the known bad apples. I can no longer use the advice of my father and mother who would tell me to respect all LEOs. Now, I have to watch and make that judgement after seeing who we are dealing with case-by-case. The vast majority of law enforcement is made up of good, decent people. Which makes their abject cowardice in the face of the small minority that's out of control even more puzzling. Are the good cops really all that good if they're willing to sell their souls for a few silver coins? The AVL records in the Sullivan case are a perfect example. Evidence is now gone, destroyed, either because it would have embarrassed a single officer or the NYSP as a whole. Just think about that for a minute- evidence in a criminal investigation has been intentionally destroyed by a person or persons unknown within the NYSP. If someone is willing to do that for a case involving misdemeanors, just how far are they willing to go for a felony case? And when do the good cops we all know exist start taking some responsibility for the bad cops? If they're willing to do anything to protect "one of their own", even for a misdemeanor, what does that say about their character? "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes", indeed. |
|
|
|
Post by corner on Jul 9, 2009 11:28:21 GMT -5
i ha d the respect of a lot of my parolees and thats really not an issue inso far as i have been retired for2 years now and my former partner called me 2 months ago with information on a specific threat,,,also back in 1999 a contract was place on my life by raymond garrett a well know and notorius drug dealer and gang leader now currently serving time once again... my comments shouldnt have been so general.. but given the state of the area of late the country in general i would exercise my right to be armed at all times its like amex i dont leave home with out it...
|
|
|
|
Post by corner on Jul 9, 2009 11:41:31 GMT -5
for the record 3 years ago next week i was in a bad motorcycle accident infront of brodock press it was a former parolle who reached me first help redirect traffic so i didnt get hit again told the police who i was and i might be armed made sure my bike got to where i wanted and showed up at the hospital before the surgery toput my leg back together...when i asked him why hesaid "you saved my life 3 years ago by riding me hard it kept me off of drugs and every time i felt i was gonna weaken i heard your voice chewing me out.. i been clean all this time because of you "i count him and many others as success stories but im not foolish enough to think they all felt that way...the problem with the current headlines is that some people in general and the press in particular like to see a LEO fall..unfortuanately Sullivans personal weakness with alcohol will be his downfall and unfortuantely will negate any good work he may have done during his long career... i get the feeling bad blood between him and Olney that night might have gone better had he followed instructions and complied and this whol thing might not have gone the way it did or appear as bad as it does.. Sullivan earned his pension and should not be denied it the damage he himself has caused to his career and reputation is now irrepairable...if he were joe citizen the only thing you would see is a blurb in the police blotter.....
|
|
|
|
Post by corner on Jul 9, 2009 11:46:41 GMT -5
also your "parolee"s po was my good friend Carl vanderlinder he took me under his wing when i was first posted to the field. Carl was a kind and gracious man who had th respect of people wherever he went...Your friend would have been welcome by many of us in that office unfortuanatelyy i can name about 2 people who would have groused about it..
|
|
boomer
Mild Pushover
Posts: 128
|
Post by boomer on Jul 9, 2009 12:37:39 GMT -5
Ya Corner the Parolee is my older brother and he says you are correct. The subject brought a lot of things flooding to the surface. I met him once when he was out and about and thought he was pretty notable! My brother has a few good stories I could ask him to relate better than I can remember them, but yes he liked Carl very much so I'm not suprised he took your comments to heart. Also note that my brother is outragously suspicious of police and yes maybe a bit quick to condemn them, he's been wrong before but a few times he was burnt for things he didn't do. He's been clean since the day he walked out of the system, largly due to Carl he says. Still angry and distrustful though.
I wonder if the actors in this play realise how much distrust they are creating by all this? It could really be damaging the whole profession to some extent. I don't know if I can trust anything I read from some of the people involved. The good thing is that it has created a lot of discussion and hopefully some understanding from "both sides" of the blue line. Each "side" seems to be looking at it through a slanted mirror a little bit, and until everyone realises is it's hard to know where the balance lies. Also, I think a lot of the anger seems to be directed squarely at Sullivan for past actions. I think this has seriously raised the stakes for those who enjoy a good public lynching. Maybe that's why this whole thing seems a bit skewwed!
|
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jul 9, 2009 12:40:09 GMT -5
What did one expect to find with the AVL records from Sullivans state vehicle? He left work, went to a meeting at Piggy Pat's and drank enough beer to allegedly be drunk and the BAC indicates that, even 3 or so hours later. If they were going to can him for driving his state car while drinking, that would most likely be done, and still may be when the state finishes their "investigation".
It seems that there is more than a passing interest in justice here. It seems that some folks simply have a personal bitch with Sullivan. He is a fairly arrogant person, but he is also a talented investigator. Cops don't make alot of friends among those that are arrested or cited, but his past seems to stay with him and the bar room deal years ago has followed him for his entire career. The disadvantage of being in the public eye. Many say that the victim in that incident simply ran his drunken mouth one time too many and got slapped down. Two sides to every story.
Sullivan has ruined a promising career, embarrassed himself and his family, damaged any chance of a future law enforcement job after retirement, and will pay a huge amount of cash for his defense, and most likely a large fine. His dad went on to be a federal marshall. That will most likely not happen for Matt.
What he did is far from right, but we don't need to strap him to a gurney or erect the gallows quite yet. He WILL pay, and he will pay dearly. Whether it happens to be enough to satisfy the indignant and righteous or not remains to be seen.
|
|
boomer
Mild Pushover
Posts: 128
|
Post by boomer on Jul 9, 2009 15:44:04 GMT -5
Clip my interest in this is two fold. I've seen what DWI does, and have seen what a wacky justice system does up close and personal with many people. So far I'm less irritated than I would have predicted. All I want to see is that everyone is satisfied with the outcome of both the issues at hand and so far all I see is a guy who looks like he's walking a bit easy and a court and DA that appears to be ignoring the law just to avoid some sort of embarassment. I guess we won't know until more comlete information drips or leaks out.
I'm less concerned with what happens to this Trooper than with what happens to people who twist the law around for whatever reason. As rotten as a DWI is a screwy court system is twice as bad to me. I have seen the damage too many times and it affects all of us..
|
|
|
|
Post by gearofzanzibar on Jul 9, 2009 17:38:49 GMT -5
What did one expect to find with the AVL records from Sullivans state vehicle? He left work, went to a meeting at Piggy Pat's and drank enough beer to allegedly be drunk and the BAC indicates that, even 3 or so hours later. If they were going to can him for driving his state car while drinking, that would most likely be done, and still may be when the state finishes their "investigation". As I've pointed out several times, the BAC is useless. That's exactly why it was administered when and where it was. It took the coordinated effort of multiple officers to make sure there wasn't a valid BAC test, and they came through with flying colors. As for the AVL records, the intentional destruction of evidence in an ongoing investigation is, last time I checked, a pretty big deal. Well, in normal cases it is. In this one? Just par for the course. It's simply unbelievable that there aren't multiple indictments for how stage-managed this incident has been. |
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jul 9, 2009 18:30:06 GMT -5
The BAC is useless simply because it was taken several hours later because Sullivan holed up in his house. That alone is what negates it's usefullness, not a conspiracy by several officers to cover Sullivan's ass.
As far as the AVL records, what proof is there that anyone intentionally destroyed them, and where would one find that information mentioned? I missed that particular allegation in the media if it was mentioned there.
It was already stated early on in the discussions and in the media that the law didn't permit the troopers on scene to bust down the door and arrest Sullivan in his home as long as he was not a threat to anyone or to himself. When the high ranking officer from downstate arrived, things moved along and he was arrested and charged. Not exactly the Branch Davidian Standoff repeated.
If it weren't for the sensationalized coverage in the press, and the public outcry, the case would simply be processed through the courts with as many postponements and adjournments as are usual with this type of case, and we would read somewhere down the road where he was forced into retirement, paid a huge fine, and lost his license to drive. End of story.
Boomer, I understand your feelings about the DWI aspect. I don't condone driving drunk by ANYONE. All I am saying is that Sullivan is not doing anything that everyone else doesn't do. He hired a high dollar, high powered attorney to defend him. He will probably pay Aney a years worth of his salary to defend his case, not because of the DWI, but because of his poor judgement in leaving the scene of the traffic stop.
As for the justice system, I have also seen it burn the poor and the little guy, while catering to those with money for an adequate defense. There is no disputing that fact. High power criminals get away with horrendous crimes with little time spent in prison, while you or I might get 6 or 8 years for a small amount of drugs or some other relatively small offense. For that reason I agree with you in your distrust of the system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jul 10, 2009 10:58:24 GMT -5
Hmmm. Today's OD is reporting that as of Thursday, Sullivan is now suspended WITHOUT pay. I guess we will see some progress in resolving the issue now won't we? Aney would never let this go on long enough for Sullivan to become the first state cop to sign up for food stamps.
I hope it appeases some of you to at least know that he is no longer being paid.
|
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Jul 10, 2009 14:31:21 GMT -5
I was wondering what this development means. It doesn't seem possible they discovered something new at this point, evidence that would motivate the SP to take this action. It could be a prelude to a future action. It could be retribution for lack of cooperation, etc. Maybe they offered him an out he didn't like and this was the stick he'll now get.
|
|
|
|
Post by corner on Jul 10, 2009 15:36:14 GMT -5
more than likely they offeredhim a settlement deal that he turned down suspension w/o pay outs pressure on him to accept what ever the offer is or come back witha negotiation of his own... i find it interesting thow because state agencies are afraid of private lawyers in these cases.... i suspect the dash cam is so aggregious to both sides of the matter but paint sullivan in a dimmer light than olney. also something else to consider is that olney could be brought up on internal charges if he didnt follow policy and procedure but this u will never hear of
|
|
|
|
Post by wcup102 on Jul 10, 2009 17:20:50 GMT -5
My feelings are that the public deserves to know that the incident occurred and justice will be or has been served. Period. Any other "digging" into a story like this is merely for vindictive and smearing reasons, such as the Observer Disgrace insists on. If it wasn't for getting ink on my arse then I would use the OD for T P!!! Thats all it is good for, oh yea and the crossword. I have known both Dave and Matt for years. Like all of us, they each have their own personalties as well as likes and dislikes about them. I have worked with both of these men and feel they have a very strong and honest work ethic. I would have either one take my back anytime, and I for them.
I have respect for both men, and I believe both have Alpha personalities and on that night all the planets aligned and the universe was forever changed. It is unfortunate that this occurred, but maybe for a reason.
Ultimately, trying someone in the media is a detriment of our society as opinions and judgements are quickly drawn, often in error, without weighing facts. This is largely due in part to the biased reporting and personal agenda of media staff who drag people through the mud because of their political affiliation or position. Decisions and trials should be based on facts and evidence and what can be proven, not baseless rhetoric and mudslinging.
I hope things work out for both Dave and Matt.
|
|
