Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nassau County Police officer Arrested For Allegedly Exposing Himself

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Now that I have dropped of my car at the shop, walked home, done some few other chores, had coffee and breakfast and played with the grandson, let me explain a bit about why I find what the chief did as pathetic.

    First of all, he should have known better than to let his emotions run rampant in a press conference because he may just have created an issue in the case. The issue about the police chief saying what he said during a press conference is not a moral one so much as it has the potential to be a legal one. He has given the defense the ammunition at least as to having the venue changed for any prosecution should the defendant decide to plead not guilty. From a prosecutorial standpoint, I would rather prosecute in Nassau County than say in New York County (Manhattan) but that might not work that way in as much as it can be said the chief potentially has prejudiced folks by way of the severity of the statements he made concerning this case. He made it seem absolute that the defendant is guilty. After seeing the video of him damning the guy, could you honestly and thus without perjuring yourself actually sit for jury selection and say under penalty of perjury that you could make an unbiased, unprejudiced, an fair decision based upon all of the evidence and only on the evidence? Heck, even I think the guy must be guilty, or at least that the police have what they believe to be an air tight case against him, for the chief to have said the things he said and any defense attorney worth 2 cents will bring up that issue and try to have the venue changed to a more liberal one. Now, it may be that the officer has stated his intentions to plead guilty or has confessed but I have seen both of those reversed in other cases and it could happen in this one.

    Of course, there is also the legal issue of the police not being judge and or jury. Their job is not to find someone guilty nor to dole out punishment, in such a case - their duty is to investigate the crime, identify and interview witnesses, collect and preserve evidence, identify any suspects, determine if there is probable cause to implicate a suspect and if so to bring him to justice but mind you and this is important - not to carry out the part of justice that takes place in the courtroom or in other words not to judge, not to deliberate as a jury, and not to acquit or convict or sentence. Law enforcement plays a vital part in identifying those believed guilty due to development of evidence that leads to PC and later to give testimony and present the evidence at trial and at sentencing but they play zero part, or should play zero direct part, in the actual deliberation as to whether or not the suspect is guilty and as to the actual determination of guilt by a judge or jury. The chief has probably prejudiced many folks that could be potential jurors in this case by way of his statements and the absoluteness of how he implicated the suspect. he may be right about it all as far as the defendant being guilty as sin and deserving of punishment but it is not his place to prejudice others, before legal proceedings, that such is the case. That he seemingly has done so is what I think is indeed pathetic because as police CHIEF he should have know better and comported himself in a more professional manner.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Glenn B View Post

      I would hope so but there has been one example after another where such has not been the case lately. It seems to be becoming the norm lately to arrive at a personal conviction of someone by way of emotion before all the facts are known.
      Hang him because he's a cop!
      Give him a break..he's a cop!

      I have no dog in this fight, but more and more, prejudice and emotion have trumped presumed innocence. A friend's deaf mute brother was arrested for exposure for taking a leak behind a building because he couldn't get use of a bathroom. and they hung him out to dry. I once parked along a road to relieve a enlarged prostate. A cop stopped because of where I had left my car and explained what was going on and he gave me a pass. I don't know if any of you have ever stood there holding and milking the wick while pee dribbled out, but it could look like you were wacking the baloney.
      Innocent or guilty, all a defense attorney has to show or suggest a history of prostate hypertrophy, and there is reasonable doubt. It is going to cost him dearly, both monetarily and emotionally.
      "If you know how many guns you own,”you don’t have enough guns.”

      "What doesn't kill you ... will circle around for a second attempt."

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Glenn B View Post
        Now that I have dropped of my car at the shop, walked home, done some few other chores, had coffee and breakfast and played with the grandson, let me explain a bit about why I find what the chief did as pathetic.

        First of all, he should have known better than to let his emotions run rampant in a press conference because he may just have created an issue in the case. The issue about the police chief saying what he said during a press conference is not a moral one so much as it has the potential to be a legal one. He has given the defense the ammunition at least as to having the venue changed for any prosecution should the defendant decide to plead not guilty. From a prosecutorial standpoint, I would rather prosecute in Nassau County than say in New York County (Manhattan) but that might not work that way in as much as it can be said the chief potentially has prejudiced folks by way of the severity of the statements he made concerning this case. He made it seem absolute that the defendant is guilty. After seeing the video of him damning the guy, could you honestly and thus without perjuring yourself actually sit for jury selection and say under penalty of perjury that you could make an unbiased, unprejudiced, an fair decision based upon all of the evidence and only on the evidence? Heck, even I think the guy must be guilty, or at least that the police have what they believe to be an air tight case against him, for the chief to have said the things he said and any defense attorney worth 2 cents will bring up that issue and try to have the venue changed to a more liberal one. Now, it may be that the officer has stated his intentions to plead guilty or has confessed but I have seen both of those reversed in other cases and it could happen in this one.

        Of course, there is also the legal issue of the police not being judge and or jury. Their job is not to find someone guilty nor to dole out punishment, in such a case - their duty is to investigate the crime, identify and interview witnesses, collect and preserve evidence, identify any suspects, determine if there is probable cause to implicate a suspect and if so to bring him to justice but mind you and this is important - not to carry out the part of justice that takes place in the courtroom or in other words not to judge, not to deliberate as a jury, and not to acquit or convict or sentence. Law enforcement plays a vital part in identifying those believed guilty due to development of evidence that leads to PC and later to give testimony and present the evidence at trial and at sentencing but they play zero part, or should play zero direct part, in the actual deliberation as to whether or not the suspect is guilty and as to the actual determination of guilt by a judge or jury. The chief has probably prejudiced many folks that could be potential jurors in this case by way of his statements and the absoluteness of how he implicated the suspect. he may be right about it all as far as the defendant being guilty as sin and deserving of punishment but it is not his place to prejudice others, before legal proceedings, that such is the case. That he seemingly has done so is what I think is indeed pathetic because as police CHIEF he should have know better and comported himself in a more professional manner.
        Do you think he’s getting the Shaft?

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by pequa1 View Post
          Was he once assigned to the PLB ? Just sayin'
          ...he does seem to like playing with his pistol.

          Seriously though, it never said he did more than expose himself, and I think it was twice. Devil's Advocate: The guy changed into a sports uniform and was seen by employees on two occasions.

          and why melt down the badge? That just seems like a commissioner wanting to distance his department from any more scandals.

          Comment


            #20
            If he did this, he's a moron that has issues.

            But, intentionally breaking a pencil, or stealing one piece of gum are higher charges than Public Lewdness. This is literally one hair above a beer ticket. I don't think the NCPD Commish is worried about 'tainting a possible jury' or a possible 'venue change' for a B misdemeanor trial.
            (although, I do know a guy who made ~30 hours overtime on a bullshit prostitution [B misd.] arrest that was fought in court. It was her 27th prostitution arrest)


            Section 245.00 Public lewdness

            A person is guilty of public lewdness when he or she intentionally exposes the private or intimate parts of his or her body in a lewd manner or commits any other lewd act: (a) in a public place, or (b) (i) in private premises under circumstances in which he or she may readily be observed from either a public place or from other private premises, and with intent that he or she be so observed, or (ii) while trespassing, as defined in section 140.05 of this part, in a dwelling as defined in subdivision three of section 140.00 of this part, under circumstances in which he or she is observed by a lawful occupant.

            Public lewdness is a class B misdemeanor.
            No Better Friend, No Worse Enemy

            - U.S. Marines

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Dan 0351 View Post
              If he did this, he's a moron that has issues.

              But, intentionally breaking a pencil, or stealing one piece of gum are higher charges than Public Lewdness. This is literally one hair above a beer ticket. I don't think the NCPD Commish is worried about 'tainting a possible jury' or a possible 'venue change' for a B misdemeanor trial.
              (although, I do know a guy who made ~30 hours overtime on a bullshit prostitution [B misd.] arrest that was fought in court. It was her 27th prostitution arrest)


              Section 245.00 Public lewdness

              A person is guilty of public lewdness when he or she intentionally exposes the private or intimate parts of his or her body in a lewd manner or commits any other lewd act: (a) in a public place, or (b) (i) in private premises under circumstances in which he or she may readily be observed from either a public place or from other private premises, and with intent that he or she be so observed, or (ii) while trespassing, as defined in section 140.05 of this part, in a dwelling as defined in subdivision three of section 140.00 of this part, under circumstances in which he or she is observed by a lawful occupant.

              Public lewdness is a class B misdemeanor.
              You said “tainting”.
              Exercise the Bill of Rights. It's good for your Constitution.

              Comment


                #22
                I have no opinion and neither should any of you.
                #alternativeviews2018
                A sunny day
                A shotgun and a Chevrolet
                Wouldn't you like that?

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Sherm66 View Post
                  Seriously, I honestly don’t get your post. How can you possibly be befuddled as to which is “more pathetic.”

                  A. Cop exposes himself masturbating to two women.
                  B. The Police Commissioner (and Public Information Officer) expresses anger and utter disgust at said perv.

                  So A and B are neck and neck in your horse race of moral equivalency and you’re unsure who you want to take the lead?

                  Next you’ll tell me the guy who ran down the 5 Boy Scouts in Manorville shouldn’t be judged harshly, that we should keep our mouths shut until he’s had his day in court.
                  So you're OK with a cop being convicted and hung solely on allegations? - no due process?

                  - so next time BLM starts squawking for an officer to be jailed - you think he should be immediately incarcerated?


                  You gotta remember, it's ALLEGEDLY - he was ACCUSED - unless and until he is proven guilty and convicted, he deserves the benefit of the doubt.

                  Put him on desk duty sure - protects him from the public that may attack him, potentially protects the public, and protects the department from possible further accusations false or founded.

                  But to fire someone due to an accusation is just foolish.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Parashooter View Post

                    So you're OK with a cop being convicted and hung solely on allegations? - no due process?
                    I'm so glad you didn't go with: "and hung largely on allegations?"
                    LI Ammo, 2 Larkfield Rd. East Northport, open seven days

                    Comment


                      #25
                      flaccid or erect ?

                      Comment


                        #26
                        2B8540E4-52F3-4237-A60F-7B43D784D193.jpeg
                        Pat ------> NRA Endowment Member

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Before I discovered I had prostate cancer, did have an enlarged prostate, and while I was still working, I had to 'go' several times each morning. My office had been closed and I returned to running cases "in the field", and often found myself in the city's finest public housing projects. thank God for Snapple bottles and opened Hagstroms. It just seems odd to me that someone, anyone, can not find a parking spot where it would be practically impossible to be seen relieving oneself.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by pequa1 View Post
                            Before I discovered I had prostate cancer, did have an enlarged prostate, and while I was still working, I had to 'go' several times each morning. My office had been closed and I returned to running cases "in the field", and often found myself in the city's finest public housing projects. thank God for Snapple bottles and opened Hagstroms. It just seems odd to me that someone, anyone, can not find a parking spot where it would be practically impossible to be seen relieving oneself.
                            In Democratic Utopia’s you can shit and piss anywhere you feel like.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by Dan 0351 View Post
                              If he did this, he's a moron that has issues.

                              But, intentionally breaking a pencil, or stealing one piece of gum are higher charges than Public Lewdness. This is literally one hair above a beer ticket. I don't think the NCPD Commish is worried about 'tainting a possible jury' or a possible 'venue change' for a B misdemeanor trial.
                              (although, I do know a guy who made ~30 hours overtime on a bullshit prostitution [B misd.] arrest that was fought in court. It was her 27th prostitution arrest)


                              Section 245.00 Public lewdness

                              A person is guilty of public lewdness when he or she intentionally exposes the private or intimate parts of his or her body in a lewd manner or commits any other lewd act: (a) in a public place, or (b) (i) in private premises under circumstances in which he or she may readily be observed from either a public place or from other private premises, and with intent that he or she be so observed, or (ii) while trespassing, as defined in section 140.05 of this part, in a dwelling as defined in subdivision three of section 140.00 of this part, under circumstances in which he or she is observed by a lawful occupant.

                              Public lewdness is a class B misdemeanor.
                              Unless the charged officer is willing to drop this along with that money someone said he stands to lose (leave time cash I think) might he not push for a hearing of some sort to prove his innocence so he does not lose that money. What the chief did potentially will have prejudiced any hearing, trial or administrative hoopla to come by essentially convicting the charged officer in the court of over emotional opinion. That stands whether the chief cares about it or not. What the chief should have cared about then was remaining professional. It is a sad truth though that so called professionals today do not have a clue how to actually act professionally in all too many cases. Emotionally grandstanding over (what you have revealed to be) such a minimal infraction is not the way to be a true professional. Now don't get me wrong, I agree with many things the chief said just not his method of delivery nor the venue in which he delivered it because of the potential for it to prejudice things related to this issue. I like the idea of t akin his badge and melting it down but I can think of a better place to put his molten badge than into the garbage.

                              Now, if the guy actually was going around showing off his tally whacker - man that is sad and sick, sick, sick. Too bad there is not more of a penalty for it to help prevent it from happening. Sad case when you think of the public trust put in police officers that there are a few like this out there. Thankfully, only a few.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by pequa1 View Post
                                Before I discovered I had prostate cancer...
                                If you have not beat it yet, I am hoping you kick cancer's arse definitively!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X