Psycho Neighbor/Cop

[Johnmelissa]

CA

Carl, my next door neighbor/cop was issued an administrative citation for harrassing the next door neighbor on the other side of his house with barking dogs. That other next door neighbor complained to the city. The dogs have stopped barking after the neighbor/cop received the citation for possessing dogs that barked excessively. Would the neighbor/cop's employing agency be interested in the citation issued against one of its officers? Is the neighbor/cop required by his agency to report any citations issued against the officer off-duty?

 

[antrc170]

Would his department be interested? Maybe, probably not. Barking dogs is not such a heinous crime that it would affect his job as a police officer.

Is he required to report it? Maybe, probably, but even if he doesn't the disciplinary action for failing to do so on barking dogs isn't going to amount to much.

 

[Johnmelissa]

It's not clear that the issuance of an administrative citation establishes that a "crime" took place. That a "sworn police officer" violates a "body of law" would seem to be of interest to a "law enforcement agency" such as the police department that employs the neighbor/cop. After multiple sustained complaints, rejection of applications for employment by other agencies, law suits, TRO hearings, arbitrations, and complaints of nuisance and disturbance by neighbors of both sides, it would seem that his agency would review an officer's stability and fitness for duty. Without doubt the "code of ethics" has been shredded by this "officer." I guess corruption on the part of elected and governmental officials is immutable and insurmountable.

 

[xylene]

You are kind of all of the map.

Did he get a citation for harassment or for having noisy barking dogs.

It is two VERY distinct things.

I really don't think you are going to see this guy fired or even disciplined over a a dog bark case.

 

[Just Blue]

lol...Has anyone else noted the name of the cop and the state OP is in??

Oh Caaarrrllll....Where are you???

 

[Zigner]

It's not clear that the issuance of an administrative citation establishes that a "crime" took place. That a "sworn police officer" violates a "body of law" would seem to be of interest to a "law enforcement agency" such as the police department that employs the neighbor/cop. After multiple sustained complaints, rejection of applications for employment by other agencies, law suits, TRO hearings, arbitrations, and complaints of nuisance and disturbance by neighbors of both sides, it would seem that his agency would review an officer's stability and fitness for duty. Without doubt the "code of ethics" has been shredded by this "officer." I guess corruption on the part of elected and governmental officials is immutable and insurmountable.

What "code of ethics" would that be?

 

[I_Got_Banned]

lol...Has anyone else noted the name of the cop and the state OP is in??

Oh Caaarrrllll....Where are you???

Actualy, I think the OP called on Carl (Cdwjava) to answer his question.


(posting hx)

 

[CdwJava]

Carl, my next door neighbor/cop was issued an administrative citation for harrassing the next door neighbor on the other side of his house with barking dogs.

I am at a loss as to what an "administrative" citation might be. Civil? Local ordinance? A warning?

Would the neighbor/cop's employing agency be interested in the citation issued against one of its officers?

It might be. But, if it is essentially a traffic ticket, they might not have any great concern. If it is an allegation of criminal conduct, then they might be. You can always call the agency and let them know.

Is the neighbor/cop required by his agency to report any citations issued against the officer off-duty?

Probably not.

I guess corruption on the part of elected and governmental officials is immutable and insurmountable.

As we have discussed many time previously, there has to be a nexus between the conduct and the employer. The agency he works for may feel that no such nexus exists, and without that nexus they are LEGALLY UNABLE to discipline in any way. Were they to try and discipline him and could no establish that nexus, he'd still have his job as well as a payout from his employer when he sued them.

For others, this is long running issue between Johnmelissa and his neighbor who happens to be an officer in a nearby jurisdiction. The neighbor seems to act crass and does what he pleases, and when he violates assorted infractions Johnmelissa's take is that the local police and the neighbor's employing agency do not seem to take the issues seriously, cutting the neighbor breaks that he believes are the result of a brotherhood of silence, corruption, or lack of will. Apparently the neighbor has already been subject to at least one disciplinary action as a result of his antics, but there appears to be no additional disciplinary actions.

The neighbor appears to be an idiot, but whether there is a nexus for the employer to act on his actions is iffy. Especially since it is very likely that the neighbor has an entirely different take on the incidents.

 

[Johnmelissa]

A nexus? Isn't A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER BREAKING THE LAW a nexus? To be sure, 10 years ago the city ordered this "policeman" to repair and rebuild the fence he had vandalized illegally and without permit on our property line. He's created nuisances/disturbances/collisions ever since. His employing agency sustained 3 complaints and suspended the "officer" for 1 week. Two local police agencies rejected his applications for employment. A collision report complete by a deputy stated that he was at fault when he hit my wife's parked car. The city issued an "administrative" citation for dog barking ordinance violation. His agency's "code of ethics" requires that officers "obey all laws." I don't know what part of "obey all laws" is not clear. I don't understand why an officer's employing agency would prominently display on its website its "code of ethics" simply to ignore it. A city ordinance against excessive dog barking is part of a body of law. Violators of that body of law are isssued citations with fines (1st $100). I don't understand what "entirely different take" this "officer" with the aforementioned history and the recipient of 3 sustained complaints and a citation issued by a municipal code enforcement dept. could have. I don't know how the hell his employing agency can call him a "law enforcement" officer. That's nothing but a joke to rational people. Note that I stated that the OTHER neighbor on the OTHER side complained about the disturbance/nuisance created deliberately by a "sworn police officer" causing an administrative citation to be issued by the city. That was the OTHER NEIGHBOR. That other neighbor came to my house to announce to me that the neighbor/cop was "crazy" and that the neighbor/cop thought of himself as a "tough guy." The OTHER neighbor told me that he "hated." Him. Oh yeah! I'll bet the psycho neighbor/cop has a "different take."

 

[Johnmelissa]

I'm reminded of Bill Clinton whose professional behavior was so eggregious, he lost his license to practice law and paid a fine. As I recall, he violated "ethical standards." I would think that the behavior of the neighbor/cop is sufficiently eggregious so that he, also, would lose his license to "enforce" the law. Unions must be eliminated - there are no unions in the military and it engages in some of the most serious tasks known to man.

Thanks, Carl

 

[CdwJava]

A nexus? Isn't A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER BREAKING THE LAW a nexus?

First off, an "administrative citation" may not be a crime. I have never heard of such a thing, so for all I know it is a warning. And, it could be the equivalent of a traffic ticket. It would certainly not be something entered into any state criminal offender record.

If you believe it is a crime that he has been accused of, then call his employing agency and brin it to their attention ... as I previously suggested.

I don't understand why an officer's employing agency would prominently display on its website its "code of ethics" simply to ignore it.

Ask them.

Maybe the agency lacks the will to terminate him, or, they lack the legal ability to do so thus far. Not knowing the details I cannot really render an opinion as to what has transpired and what the employing agency has looked into or concluded.

Has he been CONVICTED of any crime? All of those things you outline can just as easily be civil matters and not criminal. Without a criminal conviction, things become bad for him, and that is evidenced by the fact (if true) that he has been turned down for employment elsewhere. But, being a twit does not mean that the agency can terminate him.

Like I said, it could be that the agency lacks the will to pursue it that far, or, it could be that they believe they lack the legal authority to do so.

Oh yeah! I'll bet the psycho neighbor/cop has a "different take."

And his perspective has to be considered in any objective evaluation. Like it or not, even your neighbor has rights.

If you feel this guy is a disgrace and should be further disciplined, by all means contact his employer. Chances are if he is a lout in your neighborhood, he is a lout at work, too. I'd guess that he is not well liked or respected among his peers, and is likely self important and boisterous. Odds are even his peers do not care much for him. But, that does not mean he can be terminated.

As a note, Johnmelissa, even without "a union" he has rights. All employees have rights, and in CA public employees have more than others. Lawyers, teachers and doctors have far greater protections - just to put it in perspective. Heck, just TRY and fire a teacher!

Law enforcement is a profession where you CAN be terminated for off duty conduct - and it happens with some frequency. The latest trend has been officer's posting comments, pictures, and stories on line on social networking sites. Many officers have gotten rid of Facebook accounts as a result, and law enforcement managers encourage officers to stay off of them.

The point is that egregious behavior can result in discipline. Apparently, it already has. Whether anything further has occurred since the last time that is sufficient to warrant an investigation and further discipline (perhaps including termination) I cannot say. Before they can even ACT, they need to (a) be made aware of the conduct, and, (b) they have to identify a nexus to the job. This is not a guy I would appreciate defending, but, the agency cannot simply leap into events that are not within their purview.

 

[justalayman]

Johnmelissa;2792955]I'm reminded of Bill Clinton whose professional behavior was so eggregious, he lost his license to practice law and paid a fine. As I recall, he violated "ethical standards." I would think that the behavior of the neighbor/cop is sufficiently eggregious so that he, also, would lose his license to "enforce" the law.

there is a huge difference between a states bar and the sanctions they can impose and what you are dealing with.

Unions must be eliminated - there are no unions in the military and it engages in some of the most serious tasks known to man.

that is the most ridiculous statement I have heard in a long time (and I'm fricken old).

The military has no comparable civilian entity.

 

[Johnmelissa]

The similarity with the revocation of the Clinton law license was that, while it was insufficient for prosection, his behavior was professionally unacceptable. In most cases, unions protect workers who should not be protected. The AFLAC duck told a joke last month and lost his job. I guess there's no duck union.

This "dog barking citation" is a new city program to accelerate the elimination of barking dog nuisances It replaces "barking" enforcement from a contract animal control dept. in aother city. This municipal administrative citation ($100 1st, $200 2nd, $500 3rd) was issued based on a complaint by the neighbor on the other side because the neighbor/cop deliberately continued to allow his dogs to bark after the neighbor and city requested that he silence the dog barking. The neighbor kept up the harassment after being asked to stop. I don't know how to make this clear. Do you think a cop should be rejecting requests of neighbors and cities to cease nuisance/disturbances. I am not involved in this matter, other than to have suffered the noise nuisance/disturbance constantly. This was a known and deliberate act against another neighbor who then wrote letters to the city.

Unions must be eliminated. You called that RIDICULOUS. That would make not only the military but global coroporations like Toyota and many manufactureers in right-to-work states ridiculous also. Unfortunately, the ridiculous nature and demands of unions, including teachers, fire, state, courts, DMV, federal, etc., in conjunction with the union-related demands of citizens for redistributed funds like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Welfare, have led to the current inexorable course of economic failure that CA, IL, MI, many other states and the U.S. are on. Unions are what Jerry Brown represent and unions are what have brought CA to its knees. When Jerry Brown and the unions raise taxes, they will kill the goose that laid the golden egg. I reiterate: Unions must be eliminated.

The statement that "the military has no comparable civilian entity" is unintelligible. I said that the military engages in the most serious tasks known to man and IT ALLOWS NO UNIONS. The military functions very well without unions. Federal, state, country and municipal governments should, similarly, allow NO unions, pay at military rates and function similarly. I imagine governments at all levels would succeed to a high degree without union intervention and obstruction. The American and California Judiciary exist for redress while citizens must be self-reliant. I doubt that a union had anything to do with the revocation of Clinton's law license.

I appreciate the perspectives that you provide. You present positions that I haven't considered even if they are counterintuitive and I disagree. You edify.

Thanks

 

[justalayman]

The AFLAC duck told a joke last month and lost his job. I guess there's no duck union.

that was completely based on PR. Gottfried said some things that were politically incorrect. It had nothing to do with legality or even ethics.

Unions must be eliminated.

if you believe that, you have apparently never studied any labor history.

That would make not only the military but global coroporations like Toyota and many manufactureers in right-to-work states ridiculous also

. the military does not even belong in this conversation. I addressed your comment which addressed unions in regards to the military. It was and still is a ridiculous statement. Not sure how you get Toyota into that conversation.

Oh, and just so you know; Toyota's pay for a similar worker in a UAW factory is very close to the same. It's because the US car companies have legacy costs that result in a higher cost per vehicle that the newcomers to this country have not been around long enough to incur, yet.

Unfortunately, the ridiculous nature and demands of unions, including teachers, fire, state, courts, DMV, federal, etc., in conjunction with the union-related demands of citizens for redistributed funds like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Welfare, have led to the current inexorable course of economic failure that CA, IL, MI, many other states and the U.S. are on.

You obviously are ignorant of what role unions play in business.

Unions must be eliminated.

You tell me that after you are forced to work in unsafe conditions for 100 hours/week with no overtime right along with your 12 yo child on the same assembly line. You do realize that unions were a major proponent in all of the laws that prevent all of those actions, right?

I said that the military engages in the most serious tasks known to man and IT ALLOWS NO UNIONS. The military functions very well without unions.

the unions are not a business or employer such as any other in the country. Of course you aren't going to have a union in such a situation. There is no place and no need for one because, for all practical purposes, the military is more comparable to a dictatorship than a democracy ruling over a capitalistic economy. The military can place and enforce rules that would never be allowed in any other area of employment in the country. It is the only job where you can be told to effectively commit suicide and failure to do as ordered can result in your execution.

I doubt that a union had anything to do with the revocation of Clinton's law license.

not seeing your point.