You can sue SPPD for deliberate indifference

If they know they are that short and do nothing to correct, and you get hurt cuz you had no help, you can sue.

If they know that they could have doen something to improve safety for officers and just dont cuz nothing bad has happened, you can sue.

They can try and spin this crap all they want, they have liability. You just gotta find the attorney that will smash down the gates of go.

Sorry, those arguments just won't work.

"Deliberate indifference" is a term thrown about in Section 1983 litigation. It means deliberate indifference to someone's constitutional rights. You do not have a constitutional right to a safe work environment, and even if you did, there is a comprehensive remedial scheme in place (worker's compensation and OSHA remedies) that precludes bringing a 1983 suit. Forget about a federal cause of action.

As far as state law goes, the City enjoys complete soveriegn immunity for discretionary decisions, such as how many officers to employ and where to place them.

You are stuck in the worker's compensation program unless the city orders you to do something which is "substantially certain" to cause you injury, such as knowingly ordering you to drive a police cruiser with no brakes. Staffing levels just are not going to be a winning argument, as they have been low for years and there is no direct correlation with causing an injury. Even if you were to try the substantial certainty argument and were able to convice a judge to let your case go to a jury, you'll still have a tough time convincing them--the case "Marrero v. City of Tampa" tried just such an argument, blaming staffing and deployment of officers for her death, and the jury did not buy it, they blamed the bad guys and Marrero's poor use of field tactics (she's still a hero in my book).

Go Davis is still most certainly a turd, only followed, and might I add, quite closely by Baker, the supreme turdlette. Time for change, in the interest of those of us who are on the side of that which is right. Forge ahead kiddos, it is always "darkest before the dawn."

The term and conditions you are looking for are best listed under “negligent retention”. There are many cases on the books to prove there is money for those who are placed in danger by documented “negative retention”. Simply put it’s the guy/girl in read off you all know is not capable and fear them as your back up. Perhaps your Chief or his assistant fits this bill? Or another staff member who has proven he can’t perform within normal expectations in regards to safety? Your Chief is perhaps on his way out and looking for the big job downtown? Your new press guy thinks he can take the big job in the short term? Who knows? There are lots of labor lawyers who would love to hear from you guys. But lets move on! Oh no we used that term before haven’t we? Bill forget about it… You didn’t have it then and you don’t have it now…

You could just say forget any lawsuits and find a job somewhere else. It'd be easier, besides if this keeps up X-1 will be X8, copy...

Stop whining about your pension $. Let them keep it and find another job. I left and you can too.

Face it the management caters to the LAZY, RACECARD WHINING minorities. Leave and go to an agency that lets you do your job. Screw south St. Pete. Let them kill each other down there. Do you really care about protecting those lazy Social Security scamming POS's?

I laugh everytime they kill one another. Unfortunately they are reproducing at a rate of 5 to every 1 that is killed. Keep the crack coming in and get them all hooked.

They ruin everything just look at every neighborhood in every city and they are all the same. It is not a coincidence.

And that is the FACTS :evil:

Face it. If every sworn member with talent left, that would leave just most of the staff, the coalition, and their enablers/snitches. No PD can run with just 20-30 people and a couple dozen PO's.

You CAN find a job with decent pay, a staff that has faith in your decisions, and support for your actions. DO something to be part of the solution, rather than contribute to the problem.