Comment history

Suspended police officers’ names not released

"Focus on fixing something that really matters."

Cops on the take matter to me. They matter a lot.

If you think law enforcement officials trading legal favors for entertainment isn't an issue of public concern, then one would wonder what exactly you ARE concerned about. Whether some technicality in the process allows them to escape the fact that this is, from all outward perception, nothing more than a bribe, their actions were still a gross violation of the public trust.

And the public, as a body, deserves to know the names of its servants and employees who not only breach its policies, but also make a mockery of the trust and authority that the public maintains and allows its law enforcement personnel to have.

And for all of you who keep claiming that there shouldn't be a release of information because "there isn't one for policy infractions in any other job", please realize that this isn't ANY OTHER JOB. They aren't jockeying a register at Kwik Shop or flipping burgers at McDonalds or stocking shelves at Best Buy. They are sworn to uphold the law in a near-sacred bond of trust between them and the general public. We trust them to keep us safe and, above all, to be honest and forthright in their dealings with the public so we always know that justice is maintained.

February 18, 2012 at 4:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Suspended police officers’ names not released

I don't disagree. If (contrary to my own understanding of what constitutes bribery of a public official) there was no 'crime' committed here, but the officers are fired or choose to resign, then let them keep their dirty little secrets. I couldn't care less in that instance.

But if either of them are ever going to be wearing a badge again, then everyone should know who they are.

February 18, 2012 at 11:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Suspended police officers’ names not released

Law enforcement officers are (and absolutely should be) held to a higher standard than other citizens. The Department has already established guilt and, from an ethical standpoint, the citizenry as a whole should be made aware of the fact that these two men can not and should be trusted with the extreme responsibilities of their office. If the proper legal channels have determined that there was no 'crime' committed, then so be it. But the public trust in these men and their office has been violated and we deserve to be informed of the extent of that violation for reasons that both the defense attorney and the law professor in the article has already clearly outlined.

February 18, 2012 at 10:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal )