Aren’t we leaving something out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Unregistered
Major Paul Richard receives 48 hours off no pay for conduct unbecoming. In his statement the Major admits telling people, "down in front" but belives he was doing so in accordance with sports watching standards. WTF!! Did we not attend this in-service class???? SPORTS WATCHING STANDARDS, really? Is that a class at USF in his masters program? That dude has lost his mind. Couldn't just say, yea a screwed up and take you punishment. Had to deflect and try to put it on others. Bottom line Paul, you were drunk and out of control, again. This time people saw it and you are now accountable for your actions. We'd say take it like a man, but you can't do that.
Some things that are obviously missing in this case. What about excessive use. HE WAS OPENLY DRUNK AT A PUBLIC VENUE ACCORDING TO 11 WITNESSES. That is still a violation of our G.O’s. Why wasn’t he hit with that? Did they interview his wife? WE HAD A DUI HOMICIDE LEAVING THE PARK THAT DAY. DID THE MAJOR DRIVE HIS VEHICLE HOME? That is a violation of our G.O’s. WAS IT HIS PERSONAL VEHICLE OR WORK VEHICLE?
If these questions were not addressed during the IA, then the IA is not complete! If it was a regular Deputy I Guarantee that those questions would’ve been asked and the deputy would’ve been terminated.
Misfeasance in public office
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sheriff Thomas M. Knight
PAUL RICHARD DRANK 5 AND 1/2 BEERS IN ONE SITTING (IN SIX PACK TERMS):
Mr. Knight, let's break this down into lay terms that are easy to understand:
- Paul Richard told you that he drank four 16 ounce beers.
- From a six-pack point-of-view, where each beer is 12 ounces, Richard drank 5 and 1/2 beers in one sitting.
Mr. Knight, your statement that Paul Richard "only had 4 beers" is a conniving malfeasant minimization of the facts. People cannot take you as a credible arbitrator because you minimize and stretch facts to suit your desires.
DEFINITIVE EVIDENCE:
We have the following witnesses, all testifying that Major Paul Richard was "drunk and disorderly" in public:
- 1 on-duty NPPD police sergeant
- 1 off-duty BPD sergeant
- 2 children (why would kids lie?)
- 11 WITNESSES IN TOTAL
Mr. Knight, your misfeasant statement that there is "no definitive or credible evidence" that Richard was drinking is disingenuous.
INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY:
- QUESTIONS: (1) Did Richard drive himself home and (2) was this question asked during the IA? :rolleyes:
- MISFEASANT ANSWER: Mr. Knight said that there is no credible evidence that Richard was drinking. Therefore, Mr. Knight has concluded that Richard was authorized to drive himself home [sic]. :rolleyes:
Tom knight arrested for drunk and disorderly? Yes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Unregistered
It's extremely disheartening and disturbing that with 2 victims and 1 on-duty NPPD sergeant and 11 witnesses -- all stating that Paul Richard was grossly intoxicated in public -- Knight still says that there is no evidence that Paul Richard was drunk. :rolleyes:
Wasn't Knight also arrested by VPD for disorderly conduct at a bar after drinking too much alcohol? :rolleyes:
The answer is yes and by Venice Police Department. Maybe that’s why he downplayed richard’s arrest. Birds of a feather.