Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > General Topics > Law Enforcement

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 13 December 2017, 13:07
Agoge's Avatar
Agoge Agoge is online now
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 6,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Group9 View Post
This was a case of bad hiring, as much as bad policing.

And, why the background investigation for new hires is the most important investigation an officer will ever do.

Because, if a proper background investigation had been conducted on this officer, this would probably have never happened.

When you are granting the power to kill, when necessay, on behalf of the state to someone, you better be sure about the person you are granting it to.
It goes beyond that. I don't blame the initial background investigations as failures in many of these cases. The reason - there are a lot of people who look good on paper and have nothing negative counting against them. This one could have been just like that. Nothing there to preclude him from the position or lead one to believe he would take the type of actions he did for the reasons he did.

This is a larger failure on the part of those who FTO'd him. They were the one's who got to see his interactions with the public. His fear levels. His ability to de-escalate situations, and/or handle himself physically when necessary.

Chances are, there were signs and signals all along the way that could/should have caused red flags to be raised with this guys dealings. There always are. If people turn a blind eye to it, that doesn't mean they don't exist.

There were failures all along the way, but I can't claim it was hiring at that point. But, I will put a lot of emphasis on lazy, non-committed FTO's in a lot of departments.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 13 December 2017, 13:29
meatpaws meatpaws is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Georgia
Posts: 65
IMHO, it can be a multi-headed beast. From bad hiring to lazy/incompetent FTO’s as well as negligent retention when an FTO is trying to alert the training department and brass to the fact his trainee will be a liability. Some departments have issues in one or all three aspects.

Across the board manpower is low. Recruiting is told to overlook some smaller potential issues to increase trainee numbers. There is a lack of FTO officers to handle the influx of trainees so departments are promoting unfit officers to FTO status and forcing burned out FTOs to train recruits in endless cycles. And command staff is negligently retaining unfit officers to keep up numbers and increase/maintain Equal Opportunity staffing levels.

But that’s just what I’ve seen in my area.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 13 December 2017, 13:44
RedDawg_03's Avatar
RedDawg_03 RedDawg_03 is offline
Pirate and Rogue
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Central Savannah River Area
Posts: 966
It appears hes been in trouble before for too much force during an arrest......
__________________
My suggestion to you is to start drinking heavily - Bluto Blutarsky

Stupid should be a medical diagnosis - Texan

Being smart does not guarantee success, but being stupid practically guarantees failure - GSniper
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 13 December 2017, 14:06
Group9's Avatar
Group9 Group9 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agoge View Post
It goes beyond that. I don't blame the initial background investigations as failures in many of these cases. The reason - there are a lot of people who look good on paper and have nothing negative counting against them. This one could have been just like that. Nothing there to preclude him from the position or lead one to believe he would take the type of actions he did for the reasons he did.

This is a larger failure on the part of those who FTO'd him. They were the one's who got to see his interactions with the public. His fear levels. His ability to de-escalate situations, and/or handle himself physically when necessary.

Chances are, there were signs and signals all along the way that could/should have caused red flags to be raised with this guys dealings. There always are. If people turn a blind eye to it, that doesn't mean they don't exist.

There were failures all along the way, but I can't claim it was hiring at that point. But, I will put a lot of emphasis on lazy, non-committed FTO's in a lot of departments.
I say BIs, because, even in the federal system,where clearances are required, background investigations get the short shift. I've seen departments whose BI consisted of NCIC checks, and little else. That should not be acceptable. I would bet my pension that there are a half a dozen people somewhere, who could have warned someone about this officer, if only they had been asked.


In every agency I've worked in, not hiring someone because their background investigation reveals them to be unsuitable for police work is relatively easy. But, at ever stage after hire; academy, FT, probation, etc, it gets harder and harder to unhire them.

Some people are simply unsuitable. And, there is no FTO in the world who can change that fact.
__________________
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."
- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 13 December 2017, 14:08
Agoge's Avatar
Agoge Agoge is online now
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 6,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Group9 View Post
I say BIs, because, even in the federal system,where clearances are required, background investigations get the short shift. I've seen departments whose BI consisted of NCIC checks, and little else. That should not be acceptable. I would bet my pension that there are a half a dozen people somewhere, who could have warned someone about this officer, if only they had been asked.


In every agency I've worked in, not hiring someone because their background investigation reveals them to be unsuitable for police work is relatively easy. But, at ever stage after hire; academy, FT, probation, etc, it gets harder and harder to unhire them.

Some people are simply unsuitable. And, there is no FTO in the world who can change that fact.
Well...we can just disagree! There are way too many clowns that get through at every level of government through BI's.

And, employment background is a lot different than a clearance background!

And, yes, an FTO that has the backing of their department can be the best line of defense against such clownery.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 13 December 2017, 14:14
Group9's Avatar
Group9 Group9 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agoge View Post
Well...we can just disagree! There are way too many clowns that get through at every level of government through BI's.

And, employment background is a lot different than a clearance background!

And, yes, an FTO that has the backing of their department can be the best line of defense against such clownery.
A revealing moment for me, was how many people we had fail their five year re-up SSBIs because a better investigator had found something the initial investigator had missed.

I understand the basic problem. A good BI is not cheap, and a lot of small departments think they can't afford them. But, the public can't afford for them not to do good ones. And, one lawsuit can cost a lot more.

What officer hasn't encountered some new hire loser, and after working one day with him, thought "How in the hell did this zero make it through the hiring process?".

BIs must be done better.
__________________
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."
- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 13 December 2017, 16:21
bobmueller bobmueller is offline
Did...did I do that?
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Green Country, Oklahoma
Posts: 1,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by Group9 View Post
A revealing moment for me, was how many people we had fail their five year re-up SSBIs because a better investigator had found something the initial investigator had missed.
Out of curiosity, how often was there blowback against the initial investigator? I assume it was fairly rare in that it would be hard to prove neglectful work.
__________________
This message is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 13 December 2017, 16:37
Group9's Avatar
Group9 Group9 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmueller View Post
Out of curiosity, how often was there blowback against the initial investigator? I assume it was fairly rare in that it would be hard to prove neglectful work.
I don't know the answer to that. SSBIs are done by contract agencies these days. I would like to think someone in the clearance granting chain would notice a pattern and take action. But, we all know what would happen then. New company, new contract, same people. In fact, I don't remember if the same company even had the contract for five years when I was on.

If its still Friday, I work for AIS, but on Monday, I'm back at Dyncorp.
__________________
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."
- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 13 December 2017, 19:39
havok88 havok88 is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: US
Posts: 1,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmueller View Post
Out of curiosity, how often was there blowback against the initial investigator? I assume it was fairly rare in that it would be hard to prove neglectful work.
One agency that was doing them for the military was later found to have not even been conducting the investigations. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if they weren't the only ones skipping a few here and there.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 14 December 2017, 09:48
Sharky's Avatar
Sharky Sharky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SOCNET
Posts: 19,114
Interesting timing.

"Should cops lower admission requirements to entice recruits?"

http://video.foxnews.com/v/567891471...#sp=show-clips
__________________
I was born my papa's son
When I hit the ground I was on the run
I had one glad hand and the other behind
You can have yours, just give me mine
When the hound dog barkin' in the black of the night
Stick my hand in my pocket, everything's all right

-ZZ Top
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 14 December 2017, 10:29
Group9's Avatar
Group9 Group9 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharky View Post
Interesting timing.

"Should cops lower admission requirements to entice recruits?"

http://video.foxnews.com/v/567891471...#sp=show-clips
Hiring unqualified people as cops, what could go wrong?

Oh, wait, we already know. (Return to beginning of thread).
__________________
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."
- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 14 December 2017, 10:33
Agoge's Avatar
Agoge Agoge is online now
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 6,881
I would rather a quality understaffed department than one with three times the unqualified people to simply fill numbers.

Recipe for disaster!

Start lowering standards and you will reap what you sow!
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 14 December 2017, 10:54
Group9's Avatar
Group9 Group9 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 443
The problem, I fear, is that we, as a society, have made law enforcement into a career that fewer and fewer qualified people want to get into. And, that means more and more less qualified people get in. Which, by their entirely predictable actions and job performance after being hired, erodes public support for law enforcement even more, and makes it even less of a career that qualified people want to get into, and on, and on, spiraling down.

I'm retired career federal law enforcement (with state and local time in). Most of the LEOs I know, myself included, have discouraged our children from applying or aspiring to be in law enforcement.

I retired five years ahead of mandatory, because I could see the writing on the wall. I was at a retirement party the other night (the first one I had been to since my retirement six years ago). and the difference in attitude among the guys still on, than what it was twenty (or even ten) years ago, was shocking. Retirement parties used to be like weddings. This one was like a funeral.

Almost everyone was just counting the days until they could get their pension check and find a good private sector job. The ones who were staying, were just doing it for the money.

No one seems to go to mandatory any more, and I remember having to literally kick guys out the door who didn't want to leave years ago. The event really left me in kind of a bleak mood afterwards.

There are no doubt some overly aggressive, and stupid, cops out there, who are looking for violent confrontations. But, from what I saw that night, and from conversations, most would be happier if they never had to risk arresting anyone again, and live in dread of being in a shooting and having it go wrong.

But, lowering hiring standards should fix all of this.
__________________
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."
- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 14 December 2017, 11:05
Sharky's Avatar
Sharky Sharky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SOCNET
Posts: 19,114
I saw someone on the news comment the other day that they think raising LE pay too much had a negative effect. When LE pay was lower the people who gravitated to LE were there because they loved the work. With higher pay you have more people there for the paycheck who really don't give a shit about the work that they do. I think it was Dan Bongino who said that but not positive.
__________________
I was born my papa's son
When I hit the ground I was on the run
I had one glad hand and the other behind
You can have yours, just give me mine
When the hound dog barkin' in the black of the night
Stick my hand in my pocket, everything's all right

-ZZ Top
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 14 December 2017, 11:14
Front_Sight_Bang's Avatar
Front_Sight_Bang Front_Sight_Bang is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharky View Post
I saw someone on the news comment the other day that they think raising LE pay too much had a negative effect. When LE pay was lower the people who gravitated to LE were there because they loved the work. With higher pay you have more people there for the paycheck who really don't give a shit about the work that they do. I think it was Dan Bongino who said that but not positive.
I’d argue the flip side of the coin, at least in today’s climate. With a better pay/benefit package you “should” be able to discriminate between applicants and screen only the best through to be retained. Because in theory there will be plenty of guys knocking on the door to get in. I absolutely love what I do, and care about the work. At the same time however I have a family to feed, and I’m not about to do this job for peanuts. It’s expensive to pay cops well, it’s more expensive to have rent-a-cops in sworn status and paying in blood and lawsuits for their fuck ups.
__________________
Shit aint funny....
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 14 December 2017, 11:37
Sharky's Avatar
Sharky Sharky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SOCNET
Posts: 19,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Front_Sight_Bang View Post
I’d argue the flip side of the coin, at least in today’s climate. With a better pay/benefit package you “should” be able to discriminate between applicants and screen only the best through to be retained. Because in theory there will be plenty of guys knocking on the door to get in. I absolutely love what I do, and care about the work. At the same time however I have a family to feed, and I’m not about to do this job for peanuts. It’s expensive to pay cops well, it’s more expensive to have rent-a-cops in sworn status and paying in blood and lawsuits for their fuck ups.
True....but that goes straight back to the points above. You may have bigger numbers to select from but if your screening process isn't wired tight you won't be able to tell who is there for the money and who is there for the right reasons until it is too late and something like this video happens. In the lower pay scenario, less pay but more pure motives of service, your screening process isn't as critical. So, give and take I guess.

I started in local LE at $18K per year in 1994. 6P-6A. One week I worked five days. Next week I worked two days. I had to work two other jobs on my "days off" so that I could afford to do the job that I loved doing. We all did. But, we didn't have these types of issues. The only guys we had to get rid of were the one or two who just let the power of having the badge go to their heads and turned into bullies.

So, I see your point, but both sides have merit to their argument.
__________________
I was born my papa's son
When I hit the ground I was on the run
I had one glad hand and the other behind
You can have yours, just give me mine
When the hound dog barkin' in the black of the night
Stick my hand in my pocket, everything's all right

-ZZ Top
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 14 December 2017, 11:50
Sharky's Avatar
Sharky Sharky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SOCNET
Posts: 19,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDawg_03 View Post
It appears hes been in trouble before for too much force during an arrest......

Granted, I know nothing about this kid, but in the context of this video what I see in that picture is a wannabe tough guy. Possibly he was in the military but like most he didn't see any actual combat. "Coulda been SOF if he wanted to but..." Type. So he got the tattoos anyway because he thinks it makes him look like a hardass. Looks like a small guy so that could have an effect as well. Take away that badge and he is nothing.

Again, none of the above may be true. I have no idea. That's just what I see in that picture. The point is, that is my immediate perception of him as an LEO, and perception matters in the LE business.
__________________
I was born my papa's son
When I hit the ground I was on the run
I had one glad hand and the other behind
You can have yours, just give me mine
When the hound dog barkin' in the black of the night
Stick my hand in my pocket, everything's all right

-ZZ Top
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 14 December 2017, 11:53
Front_Sight_Bang's Avatar
Front_Sight_Bang Front_Sight_Bang is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nevada
Posts: 1,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharky View Post
So, I see your point, but both sides have merit to their argument.
Without question.
__________________
Shit aint funny....
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 14 December 2017, 15:18
Group9's Avatar
Group9 Group9 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 443
I don't know. One comment I heard several times, was "They really don't want us to arrest anybody or do anything any more". That's not the kind of policy that attracts guys who love law enforcement.
__________________
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."
- last words of Pancho Villa (1877-1923)
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 15 December 2017, 08:31
Believeraz's Avatar
Believeraz Believeraz is offline
Rocket Surgeon
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Tilting at Windmills
Posts: 2,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Group9 View Post
Because, if a proper background investigation had been conducted on this officer, this would probably have never happened.
I don't know what standards this guy was hired under, however I processed with Mesa PD and went through their entire background investigation and received a final offer of hire in 2001. Their background investigation was more thorough than I ever went through during multiple federal backgrounds, (multiple secret and TS), as well as state/local ones. Mesa's polygraph alone was full lifestyle in scope and took almost an entire day. They flew an investigator to my prior residences to do in-person interviews and verification, all the way back to my high school and college disciplinary records and teacher interviews.

If you really want to talk about negligent retention, I can tell you stories about the character and conduct of agents from the DEA, FBI, and Army CID I've worked with/dealt with over the years.
__________________
_________________

"Butch up, prom queen"
-Wench

Last edited by Believeraz; 15 December 2017 at 08:45.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:45.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
SOCNET