+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
 
  1. #1
    Unregistered
    Guest

    Sad day in law enforcement

    When cops are allowed to be corrupt the entire system is corrupt

  2. #2
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Agreed. Look at the fat sack of shit you have as an ass chief.

  3. #3
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Agreed. Look at the fat sack of shit you have as an ass chief.
    It sucks being you guys stuck with no life and hiding behind a computer. It sucks being you

  4. #4
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    It sucks being you guys stuck with no life and hiding behind a computer. It sucks being you
    No it sucks being you!

  5. #5
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    It sucks being you guys stuck with no life and hiding behind a computer. It sucks being you
    Really? Is that the best you got? Because you are doing the same thing moron.

  6. #6
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Really? Is that the best you got? Because you are doing the same thing moron.
    It totally sucks being you guys it’s almost entertaining

  7. #7
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    When cops are allowed to be corrupt the entire system is corrupt
    True! The Italians have a proverb; it says" "The fish rots from the head down." As it pertains to the Miami Police Department, the aphorism is quite apropos.

    Lost in all the hoopla surrounding Ortiz's being acquiescently returned to duty by the city manager is a proven standard that here seems to have been ignored. In police agencies like Dade County's, when the SAO returns a disciplinary action package, submitted by the police agency for prosecutorial review and or actual prosecution, the SAO often, does so with a recommendation for "Administrative Action," meaning the department head can proceed with the agency's own disciplinary action, termination in Ortiz's case. Was that the case with Ortiz's package? No, and if so, why not? Or is it the disciplinary package was so bereft of substantive evidence that it would not rise to the standard of proof in Civil Service Disciplinary Hearings, that being Preponderance of the Evidence, meaning 50% plus a scintilla of proof. In other words, a farce to hide Ortiz from public view, until the "I am Black" embarrassment blew over.

    If there is more than 50% Preponderance of the Evidence, then the city manager can and should have fired Ortiz, and have the captain battle it at the appeals process. City Commissioners must investigate and subject the city manager to pertinent, penetrating questions.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •