No Cops don't get a leniency that regular folk don't.

[SavannahMann]

Corrupt police when they are caught, basically spend no time paying for their crimes. Of course, there are exceptions, but those exceptions are so extraordinary they prove the rule.

Arizona, a Sheriff was stealing money, lying about it, and defrauding the county. Bernie Madoff was cheating and stealing, and he is the devil that proves we need oversight according to many.

Worst of the Month — February

Remember he was embezzling cash from the seized asset fund. So what punishment will this crook face?

The plea bargain dismisses all felonies, with Radtke admitting to three misdemeanor theft counts. He agreed to not seek employment as a law-enforcement officer or with Pima County government. In return, prosecutors will request one year of probation without incarceration and will not prosecute Radtke for other offenses.

The deal allows Radtke to receive an $82,800 annual pension from the state Public Safety Personnel Retirement System and a one-time $505,000 payment from the system’s Deferred Retirement Option Plan, according to the retirement system’s records. Within six years, Radtke will receive more than $1 million in state retirement benefits.

Had Radtke been convicted of any of the felony charges against him, he would have been required by law to forfeit his state pension because the crime was committed in the course of his role as a public official for a government employer.

The plea was accepted by Magistrate Judge Eric Markovich. Sentencing is scheduled for April 7 in U.S. District Court in Tucson.

Tell me again defenders of the thin blue li(n)e how unfair and hard it is to be a cop. Imagine the stress that the cops feel knowing that if they're caught, they'll get away with it anyway.

The Prosecutors, Judges, and other cops all want to take care of this guy, because he was a cop and thus a member of the gang. That's how they react to all crooked cops.

Yes he was just one, and there are tens of thousands who were not charged with this particular crime. Yet, the pattern emerges if you care to look at the information.

SPD Sgt. accused of tipping off officer suspended for a month

Now, if you were anyone else and tipped off the subject of an investigation that the cops were looking at him. Guess what? You wouldn't get suspended for a month, you would be looking at Conspiracy, interfering with an investigation, perhaps accessory after the fact. But if you're a cop, and you let another cop know he's being investigated for raping another cop, well that's just a minor employment issue we can take care of administratively.

Seriously, he notified a fellow cop that they were looking at him for a Rape. And all he got for that was a month off of work.

 

[Iceweasel]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

 

[BULLDOG]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

True, many don't make it, but unfortunately many who shouldn't make it do. I truly believe the large majority of cops are professionals who behave as they should.That's why it's so disappointing to see all those otherwise fine officers defend the very ones who make it impossible for the entire group to enjoy the trust and respect they need do their job. Their first job should to be policing themselves.

 

[Iceweasel]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

True, many don't make it, but unfortunately many who shouldn't make it do. I truly believe the large majority of cops are professionals who behave as they should.That's why it's so disappointing to see all those otherwise fine officers defend the very ones who make it impossible for the entire group to enjoy the trust and respect they need do their job. Their first job should to be policing themselves.

Most people do trust and respect leos, don't let the malcontents fool you.

 

[SavannahMann]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

 

[Iceweasel]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

I don't follow links.

 

[SavannahMann]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

True, many don't make it, but unfortunately many who shouldn't make it do. I truly believe the large majority of cops are professionals who behave as they should.That's why it's so disappointing to see all those otherwise fine officers defend the very ones who make it impossible for the entire group to enjoy the trust and respect they need do their job. Their first job should to be policing themselves.

The rub is that they don't police themselves. When one is caught doing something wrong they say it is Bob and he is a good guy and a good cop. We don't want to ruin a career for one thing.

Embezzlement is a felony. People were furious because Ken Lay died before he could go to Prison to pay for the crimes Enron committed. The penalties for this crime are stiff because by definition they can only be committed by someone who is in a position of trust.

Well they are stiff for anyone who isn't a member of the brotherhood of the badge.

What is the difference between a neighborhood being controlled by a Mafia and the police? Everyone knows the Mafia guys are crooks. But many people want to pretend the cops aren't.

They use an asinine standard where police come in. To apply that standard for the rest of the population then very few people would go to jail. He robbed a bank, but he only robbed one. He didn't rob every bank. There were a thousand times he didn't and that counts more than the one he did rob.

The second example above was a cop who was raped. She was raped by another cop. So the Sergeant tried to help a fellow cop who raped a cop. How does that female cop go back to work knowing the supervisor tried to protect her attacker?

The honest cops are run off. The corrupt are in control and people want to pretend they aren't. The standard is every time. They don't lie every time they pull someone over. They don't plant evidence every time. They don't steal every time. Once is enough. Once is too much.

 

[SavannahMann]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

I don't follow links.

I'm not surprised. It would be hard to remain ignorant if you learned.

 

[BULLDOG]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

I don't follow links.

That's why nobody bothers when you ask for proof.

 

[Iceweasel]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

I don't follow links.

That's why nobody bothers when you ask for proof.
View attachment 116473

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

 

[BULLDOG]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

I don't follow links.

That's why nobody bothers when you ask for proof.
View attachment 116473

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links" here are quite a few of those here, and to them I say

 

[Anathema]

I'll start worrying about punishing police after we start training, paying, staffing and supporting them (on a national level) the way we should be. Until then, I don't give a ahit.

 

[Iceweasel]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison. You have selective reasoning. Unfortunately law enforcement has to pick from the human population. The testing and weeding out process is pretty good, many don't make it in.

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

I don't follow links.

That's why nobody bothers when you ask for proof.
View attachment 116473

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links" here are quite a few of those here, and to them I say

You're a liar. You ignored my point and misrepresented what I said. You're a liberal because you are stupid and dishonest.

 

[BULLDOG]

Methuen police gave preference to those who wouldn’t arrest fellow officers - The Boston Globe

Right.

I don't follow links.

That's why nobody bothers when you ask for proof.
View attachment 116473

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links" here are quite a few of those here, and to them I say

You're a liar. You ignored my point and misrepresented what I said. You're a liberal because you are stupid and dishonest.

You're the one who doesn't do links.

 

[Iceweasel]

I don't follow links.

That's why nobody bothers when you ask for proof.
View attachment 116473

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links" here are quite a few of those here, and to them I say

You're a liar. You ignored my point and misrepresented what I said. You're a liberal because you are stupid and dishonest.

You're the one who doesn't do links.

I've posted many and read many.

I said:
"A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault."

You then claimed I said:
"Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links"

Like I said you're stupid and dishonest, that's why you're a liberal.

 

[BULLDOG]

That's why nobody bothers when you ask for proof.
View attachment 116473

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links" here are quite a few of those here, and to them I say

You're a liar. You ignored my point and misrepresented what I said. You're a liberal because you are stupid and dishonest.

You're the one who doesn't do links.

I've posted many and read many.

I said:
"A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault."

You then claimed I said:
"Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links"

Like I said you're stupid and dishonest, that's why you're a liberal.

You're confused again. You did say "I don't follow links" If you don't remember that, go back and read your own post.

 

[Iceweasel]

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links" here are quite a few of those here, and to them I say

You're a liar. You ignored my point and misrepresented what I said. You're a liberal because you are stupid and dishonest.

You're the one who doesn't do links.

I've posted many and read many.

I said:
"A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault."

You then claimed I said:
"Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links"

Like I said you're stupid and dishonest, that's why you're a liberal.

You're confused again. You did say "I don't follow links" If you don't remember that, go back and read your own post.

I said:
"A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault."

You then claimed I said:
"Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links"

Like I said you're stupid and dishonest, that's why you're a liberal.

 

[SavannahMann]

A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault.

More importantly, many have provided such so you do not speak for the board. You're stupid to say something that off.

Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links" here are quite a few of those here, and to them I say

You're a liar. You ignored my point and misrepresented what I said. You're a liberal because you are stupid and dishonest.

You're the one who doesn't do links.

I've posted many and read many.

I said:
"A link is something you click on, not proof. When I post links I post the content that makes my case. I'm not going to read a whole web page to try to figure out your point. If someone is too lazy or stupid to find relevant content it isn't my fault."

You then claimed I said:
"Mine is a perfectly reasonable response for people who have already stated that they won't accept ANY proof of ANYTHING unless it agrees with what they already think, or people who have said things like "I don't follow links"

Like I said you're stupid and dishonest, that's why you're a liberal.

You're confused again. You did say "I don't follow links" If you don't remember that, go back and read your own post.

I've run into this with him before. I'm starting to think he suffers from Alzheimer's. Like Ten Second Ted on 50 first dates he doesn't recall what he said five minutes before. It's why I refer to him as an unequaled jackass.

 

[SavannahMann]

I'll start worrying about punishing police after we start training, paying, staffing and supporting them (on a national level) the way we should be. Until then, I don't give a ahit.

How much training do you think it will take before the police understand they aren't supposed to steal?

Former Greensboro police officer, High Point officer charged in break-ins

Former Simpsonville police officer gets 12 years for P.D. robbery | SentinelNews.com

South Bay cop arrested for stealing marijuana while on duty

I mean most of us learned that lesson by the time we were in Kindergarten. How much training are we going to have to fund to teach them to stop stealing?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Cops go get canned and even sent to prison.

Not nearly enough