Discipline for Seizure of Evidence

Question: Is it standard policy to return cocaine back to the drug pusher rather than seize it? In circuit I an office manager is being investigated for violation of the policy that no DOC employee is to take into custody any evidence IF the local law enforcement officers will not do it. In this case it was cocaine and the local LEO's have a policy that if it a seizure by at PO then the PO takes it into custody. When the office manager who was out with their officer saw that the LEO's weren't not going to take it into custody they seized the cocaine and turned it into evidence at the sheriff's office. The only other choice would have been to turn it back over to the drug dealer. I can just imagine if the media got ahold of this how they would make a field day of it that state probation officers are giving drugs back to the drug dealers. I'm sure one could question why the local sheriff's office in Pensacola has their policy but does that justify DOC having theirs? Do we guns back to the criminals? Child porn? How are other circuits handling this or is it just Circuit I? Signed Bewildered.

This should go in your favor.

the training we had said we're to take it to sheriff evidence if the LEO won't do it.

Why would the office manager transport cocaine? That is the question. DC does not pay enough to transport contraband, guns or drugs. Some policies work in the officer’s favor and some do not, with that said, that is why the PP76 can be your best friend. IN TRAINING WE WERE TOLD "IF LEO DOES NOT TRANSPORT, THEN CONTACT THE DCA, CA, OR UP THE CHAIN OF COMMAND SO THEY COULD HANDLE THE SITUATION" That is where the office manager went wrong and took matters unto his own hands. If the office manager would have followed policy, it would have been upper management's issue to resolve and the office manager would not be under investigation.

Signed just wondering!

There are several circuits that PO's are required to transport evidence (during searches) this is not because they want to but because local law enforcement will not do it for them. You are wrong when you say policy speficies we are not to transport evidence. This is why evidence handling was included in the recent search traning. Your supv who handed the drugs back over should be fired, that offender should have been warrantless arrested and another affidavit submitted charging him/her with the new possession charge. It's a shame, a real shame.

It did not state that the supervisor gave the drugs back to the offender. He is under investigation for transporting cocaine to the local sheriff office. Why is the supervisor is under investigation if policy allows transporting evidence ?

Interesting seek representation from PBA if a member. Is there anymore to the story?

Sounds likes like the office manager needs to take to GIL. GIL is in Circuit 1 (Right)

Anyone who can read at the 8TH GRADE LEVEL can see that there is nothing in 302.311 that prohibits the PO from taking the evidence directly to the Sheriffs Office if the LEO will not do it. Anything not expressly prohibited is permitted, but in fact the proceedure provides for it. Does someone have a belated not so hidden agenda? Is it any wonder why some of us are stressed out and under medical care?

ALL I CAN SAY IS I AM AN XCPO FROM NORTH FLA AND SO GLAD. DOC IS RETARTED AND THE STAFF ON ALL LEVELS ARE NOT LEO'S AND THE CPO'S FOR THE MOST PART SHOULD NOT HAVE A BADGE IT IS ALL A FREAKING JOKE AT DOC.

test

You have strength of character, courage, and cahones to stand up for what is right. DC needs more like you. Best wishes.

To the Office Supervisor involved whoever you are: Surely these responses will aid in your defense due to the fact that no two circuits seem to have the same procedures. In this case the deputies do not want to transport something like drugs because what if there is a difference in the amount of drugs that the deputy turns in versus the amount they supposedly were given. Sometimes allegations equals conviction depending on what agency you're with. Plus the LEO's in Northwest Florida feel like the state probation officers are law enforcement officers and are duly authorized to transport the evidence per statute so why should they do it for them. Deputies don't transport for city police officers do they? State PO's have the power to arrest, carry weapons, high hazard retirement so why can't they transport evidence like any other law enforcement officer. It seems to be that the higher ups are the ones confused or maybe just the ones in Circuit I, who knows? Any suggestions for the Office supervisor from cyberworld out there>

RETARTED? What the hell is that?

[Paladin]

RETARTED? What the hell is that? That explains why XCPO is an XCPO.

To the Supervisor:

Don't be conspicuous - it draws fire. (Are you too outspoken?)

No plan survives the first contact. (You adapted, overcame, and will survive.)

If you are forward of your position, the artillery will fall short.(Young Lieutentants do not always appreciate the wisdom of a seasoned Sergeant.)

Anything you do can get you shot - including doing nothing. (At least you do not hide under your desk!)

You are an Army of One, not Superman. When the enemy holds the high ground, call for air support! (PBA. Also other Circuits who transport evidence please acknowledge and help out.)

Question: Is it standard policy to return cocaine back to the drug pusher rather than seize it? In circuit I an office manager is being investigated for violation of the policy that no DOC employee is to take into custody any evidence IF the local law enforcement officers will not do it. In this case it was cocaine and the local LEO's have a policy that if it a seizure by at PO then the PO takes it into custody. When the office manager who was out with their officer saw that the LEO's weren't not going to take it into custody they seized the cocaine and turned it into evidence at the sheriff's office. The only other choice would have been to turn it back over to the drug dealer. I can just imagine if the media got ahold of this how they would make a field day of it that state probation officers are giving drugs back to the drug dealers. I'm sure one could question why the local sheriff's office in Pensacola has their policy but does that justify DOC having theirs? Do we guns back to the criminals? Child porn? How are other circuits handling this or is it just Circuit I? Signed Bewildered. Thanks for the heads up. Forewarned is forearmed. If this is in fact my incident, 18 MONTHS AGO, I handled it correctly.

Have you ever examined Party Poker Blackjack (http://www.party-poker-blackjack.com)Party Poker Blackjack (http://www.party-poker-blackjack.com) the ingredients listed on Online Poker Party (http://www.onlinepartypoker4u.com)Online Poker Party (http://www.onlinepartypoker4u.com) the labels of your Party Poker Download (http://www.the-poker-list.com)Party Poker Download (http://www.the-poker-list.com) cosmetics or other skin Free Party Poker Bonus (http://www.gemni-poker.com)Free Party Poker Bonus (http://www.gemni-poker.com) care products. Do you Poker Bonus (http://www.absolute-poker-bonus.com)Poker Bonus (http://www.absolute-poker-bonus.com) know what those ingredients Poker Freerolls (http://www.breakaway-poker.com)Poker Freerolls (http://www.breakaway-poker.com) are.