What happened in Citrus

Let me chime in here. Well said "footlong". People can say wannabees all they want. Our job is to put people who continue to go down the wrong path in Jail. Re-entry and all that other stuff is fine but when it comes down to it, puuting the bad people or dangerous people back in jail is our job. something is definetly wrong here. This same office has called me on the phone reguarding a sex offender. this situation without going into details needed a PC to be done and that's what I told her on the phone. I was told that Gwendolyn Mobley does not permit any PC's or searches in her office. The officer agreed with me, but stated if she tries to do any arrest she will face a write up byMobley. This is not the first. Many Officers from that office have tld me that they cant even place someone in custody in there office who has a warrant. They are forced to let them go, then call police. (what the hell ls going on)

Shoot. If the offender is truely dangerous, bypass what's her/his name, go to the CA. If he/she says no, go to the RD. If the RD says no, case note it and tell him if anything happens, you'll be the first one speaking to the press.

Make sure your off probation.

LOL

You arent going to get in any trouble if a supervisor tells you not to PC someone. Just do your job and let the higher ups handle those decisions and consequences. A PC was almost non-existant prior to Zero Tolerance. I think Zero Tolerance has affected people a little too much. It is gone - get over it.

Shoot. If the offender is truely dangerous, bypass what's her/his name, go to the CA. If he/she says no, go to the RD. If the RD says no, case note it and tell him if anything happens, you'll be the first one speaking to the press.

Make sure your off probation.

LOL

Don't ask anyone just do it!

[CPT Aubrey]

How sad. You have the left and the right. Both are full or crap.

Pretty well sums up the entire country.

Let me recap:

As I understand it, you have a supervisor who refuses to PC arrest anyone. On the other hand, you have an officer who truly beleives an offender is a danger to the community and should be arrested.

On the left, you have this answer:

You arent going to get in any trouble if a supervisor tells you not to PC someone. Just do your job and let the higher ups handle those decisions and consequences. A PC was almost non-existant prior to Zero Tolerance. I think Zero Tolerance has affected people a little too much. It is gone - get over it.

On the right, there's this:

Don't ask anyone just do it!

Well, lefty liberal? The officer will get into trouble for not doing the right thing. When the higher ups are looking for scapegoats, they first reach into the ranks. How many historical examples do you need? A PC was non-existant prior to zero tolerance, because most of the leadership were balless.

An example? The head of a particluar Circuit squealed like a stuck pig if you wanted to do a warrantless arrest. He/she later became the head of CC operations under Crosby. The very person in charge of the "No Tolerance" policy. In fact, most of the leadership in CC under Crosby simply faded into lesser leadship positions.

And to fu*k full steam a head? No, Chief. You owe your chain of command and you have a duty to follow it.

And after you have followed it and the chain fails to see the rightness? Like the previous poster said- make a case note and if things go wrong, be the first one to the media.

Then? Get a lawyer.

[CPSO North]

If this situation (no pc's, no searches) is true, then that is deplorable. Even prior to the days of zero tolerance, we STILL had situations that required PC arrests, although it was a rare occurrence. Situations arose that caused even the most social work oriented supervisors to tell us to arrest someone then and there, especially sex offenders. Here's a simple test to find out if this was really the case with that supervisor - someone in Tallahassee needs to run a report showing all the PC arrests during that time period. If there are none, then you have a supervisor that is not following the mandate to protect public safety, and when the press figures that out major drama is sure to follow.

And ain't that the ballsy truth! See who is still round as head of CC or Rgional Directors or others that were under Crosby:

How sad. You have the left and the right. Both are full or crap.

Pretty well sums up the entire country.

Let me recap:

As I understand it, you have a supervisor who refuses to PC arrest anyone. On the other hand, you have an officer who truly beleives an offender is a danger to the community and should be arrested.

On the left, you have this answer:

You arent going to get in any trouble if a supervisor tells you not to PC someone. Just do your job and let the higher ups handle those decisions and consequences. A PC was almost non-existant prior to Zero Tolerance. I think Zero Tolerance has affected people a little too much. It is gone - get over it.

On the right, there's this:

Don't ask anyone just do it!

Well, lefty liberal? The officer will get into trouble for not doing the right thing. When the higher ups are looking for scapegoats, they first reach into the ranks. How many historical examples do you need? A PC was non-existant prior to zero tolerance, because most of the leadership were balless.

An example? The head of a particluar Circuit squealed like a stuck pig if you wanted to do a warrantless arrest. He/she later became the head of CC operations under Crosby. The very person in charge of the "No Tolerance" policy. In fact, most of the leadership in CC under Crosby simply faded into lesser leadship positions.

And to fu*k full steam a head? No, Chief. You owe your chain of command and you have a duty to follow it.

And after you have followed it and the chain fails to see the rightness? Like the previous poster said- make a case note and if things go wrong, be the first one to the media.

Then? Get a lawyer.CPT Aubrey
LEO Affairs Colonel
Posts: 329
Joined: 10/20/08 19:15:00

Read the whole string!

CPSONorth?

I can name the CA Aubrey is talking about. All know it's true.

Quit the BS.

And ain't that the ballsy truth! See who is still round as head of CC or Rgional Directors or others that were under Crosby:

How sad. You have the left and the right. Both are full or crap.

Pretty well sums up the entire country.

Let me recap:

As I understand it, you have a supervisor who refuses to PC arrest anyone. On the other hand, you have an officer who truly beleives an offender is a danger to the community and should be arrested.

On the left, you have this answer:

You arent going to get in any trouble if a supervisor tells you not to PC someone. Just do your job and let the higher ups handle those decisions and consequences. A PC was almost non-existant prior to Zero Tolerance. I think Zero Tolerance has affected people a little too much. It is gone - get over it.

On the right, there's this:

[quote:3mu84ix1]Don't ask anyone just do it!

Well, lefty liberal? The officer will get into trouble for not doing the right thing. When the higher ups are looking for scapegoats, they first reach into the ranks. How many historical examples do you need? A PC was non-existant prior to zero tolerance, because most of the leadership were balless.

An example? The head of a particluar Circuit squealed like a stuck pig if you wanted to do a warrantless arrest. He/she later became the head of CC operations under Crosby. The very person in charge of the "No Tolerance" policy. In fact, most of the leadership in CC under Crosby simply faded into lesser leadship positions.

And to fu*k full steam a head? No, Chief. You owe your chain of command and you have a duty to follow it.

And after you have followed it and the chain fails to see the rightness? Like the previous poster said- make a case note and if things go wrong, be the first one to the media.

Then? Get a lawyer.CPT Aubrey
LEO Affairs Colonel
Posts: 329
Joined: 10/20/08 19:15:00[/quote:3mu84ix1]

If you are instructed by your supervisor not to do a PC and one is not required by policy (which doesnt 100% require a PC now for most things as it is a pretty vague policy) you will not get in big trouble most likely unless it is something that there should be no question whatsoever then they might drop the you should have went up the chain and that would mean the supervisor would be getting fired also. Crosby and his Deltona thug nonsense is gone.

All you have to do is check the Office PC history over the past year. My Office does at least does 1 a week. Searches! I dont know if I believe that , we do tons and I'm sure everybody else does. If it comes up that no PC's have been done, then Mrs. Mobley has alot to worry about.

The other issue I heard is warrants. In our office if someone with a warrant comes in they are handcuffed and placed under arrest. They are detained until local leo arrives for transport. I even know of a supervisor in my circuit that was in some hot water for letting someone go that had a warrant. No question on this one, you dont let people go that have warrants, even if it requires the proper use of force. I will even take this 1 step further. If the local Deputy will not do the arrest for the warrant, we will.

I am sure there is another side to this story. There is probably some good reason why an arrest was not done. However, I sill wonder once the off duty P.O. saw the Offender, why he was not given the ok to apprehend her. I looked up the supervisor on staff look up and she has years of experience so I certainly am not in a position to question if she did anything wrong, I'm sure she had reason and knew what she was doing.