Officer ignores robbery in progress

[wannabe1]

Have any of you ever seen this kind of neglect of duty/cowardice before?

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-detect04.html


...and what do you think should happen to this officer?

[Cop2B]

That is absoloutely disgraceful! I hope she get's what she deserves. Over the years, I have personally put myself in the line of danger to help stop a crime, and that was before I had the notion of becoming involved in law enforcement.

I believe that she should not be trusted to wear a shield. (That is if all the information is correct that was printed in the article.)

I look up to the police, and when I hear stories like this one, I hope they never hit close to home, where I would have to be ashemed to call someone my brother or sister.

[BrickCop]

Maybe she was giving the robbers "professional courtesy".:D

Seriously, she should be fired, what a disgrace.

I don't know this for certain but I would not be suprised to learn she was an affirmative action hire.

She was too busy SHOPPING to do her job?!:mad: If I lived in Chicago I'd be bull with any punishment less than termination.

[J.DIXON]

Chickens**t. Plain and simple. She should be fired outright for dereliction of duty. As an officer,it is your duty to act. I carry when I am off for various reasons and have been involved in several off duty crimes in progress. In each case the would be offender was stopped before anyone could come to harm. There are a lot of officers who are just plain cowards and do not deserve to wear a badge. My question to all of those who will not nut up is this: How will you feel if a brother/sister officer is injured or killed because you are too chickens**t to act? God help you if me or anyone else is injured because of your cowardice. There will be no where that you are safe.:mad:

[Beanstick]

I hope someone kicks her *****.

[Padres19]

I have absolutely no problem with her not throwing off her clothes to reveal her Supergirl costume. So she's expected to take on TWO armed robbers and perhaps exchange gunfire in a supermarket? What if she isn't superhuman like many of you in this thread and doesn't get the drop on them? What if there's a third robber lying in wait? How 'bout if this turns into a hostage situation? I don't have a problem if she evaluated the risk to the citizens and didn't act. Weren't any of you taught in your academies that sometimes it's best to be the best witness? And that's nice Brickcop...let's immediately start with the "she must be an affirmative action hire." Matter of fact, this should be proof that women don't belong in police work.

Having said that, this woman still deserves to be sacked. Where I have the real problem is that she did nothing after the fact. In the news report it appears she minded her own business and never assisted responding officers. Never even ID'd herself, but bought her bottle of Evian and drove off like nothing happened. She should be helping with the crime scene and providing a statement. If she observed the robbers, which she denies, she should have obtained as much information as possible and even considered following these people. She had an unmarked unit, so she has access to a police radio, not to mention what detective doesn't have a cell phone?!? If she gave false information to the rat squad (IAB), that needs to be looked at for discipline as well.

[Beanstick]

Two, three, four robbers, sorry bro, but in LE you take the good with the bad and the worse. What if those robbers decided to start taking out witnesses? The lists of "what ifs" can go on , so I will not get into that. You cant decide to all of a sudden be a cop now and then hide your credentials when things go bad. Either way, what is done is done, I am sure her department is giving her hundreds of pats on the back for her outstanding depiction of valor and service to the community.

She is a detective for crying out loud. These people supposedly need to be smart in some way or form. You would think if she didnt want to get up front and personal, she would atleast think of something useful that would help the rest of the department-great example of teamwork there.

I hate cops with no spine. Shows how much they really love being in LE, sheesh. Please dont defend her unless you are willing to have her as a partner and if you do, i ll let her speak for both of you.:mad:

[J.DIXON]

Who cares how many perps there are? She took an OATH. You do not pick and choose which situations to respond and not respond to. If there are 2 perps,so be it. If they had started shooting innocents,what would her response be? "I can't go in there,they have guns!" as she cowers behind cover. Now as I see it,if this was me,I only have one choice. To do my duty. If I go in and catch a bullet,then so be it. I did my job,to the best of my abillities.What I want to know is whatever happend to HONOR?

[retired]

Originally posted by J.DIXON
Who cares how many perps there are? She took an OATH. You do not pick and choose which situations to respond and not respond to. If there are 2 perps,so be it. If they had started shooting innocents,what would her response be? "I can't go in there,they have guns!" as she cowers behind cover. Now as I see it,if this was me,I only have one choice. To do my duty. If I go in and catch a bullet,then so be it. I did my job,to the best of my abillities.What I want to know is whatever happend to HONOR?

My department policy states that we will not take any action that might place civilians in any danger. This situation in my opinion clearly indicates a high probablity of endangering a civilian. While the story about her conduct certainly leaves a bad taste, I would have to agree with her not engaging the suspects in what in all liklihood would end in gunfire. The money loss can be recovered, a dead civilian or officer cannot. With that said, the rest of her actions certainly call for an IA investigation, and some discipline to say the least.

[Beanstick]

I still cant reason why anyone would back this woman up. Endangering civilians? C'mon now, thats another way of saying, "I cant go in there because I might get hurt." Then what is the purpose to have LE around? Why do you think we are issued guns?

Worst case scenario:

She walks into the robbery in progess. The two thugs see her. Hopefully she has her weapon drawned. They point their weapons at her. They are at a stand still. While she has their attention someone calls 911 for help. Minutes later, the whole damn department is there. They can either shoot it out with the police, unlikely, or then notice that they are severly out manned and gunned- they give up.

Either way the good guys win and they demonstrate that they are not going to back down no matter what the situation.

Do you really think she was thinking about the safety of the victims during the robbery while she was paying for her bottled water?

Please dont justify her actions with more BS. If you are a cop, guess what like JD said, you took an OATH. Anyone whos taken the oath can go back and read it again, somewhere in there it says something about " serve and protect" not ignore and hide.

[retired]

Beanstick,

Yes I am a retired cop with 31 years of service, and quite frankly your comments reveal that you know absolutely nothing about robbery in progress tactics and departmental policies. A LEO never unnecessarily endangers the lives of civilians or LEO's. Quite frankly part of what she did was correct, she didn't engage the suspects in a possible gunfight in a crowded location with unarmed and innocent civilians. Secondly, if she had, when the uniform cops arrived, chances are since she was in civilian clothes, they wouldn't know she was another cop, and she may have beeen shot by other LEO's thinking she was a suspect. The loss of the money means nothing compared to the unnecessary loss of lives.

However, as I said, if she continued shopping and actually was in line for a purchase, she needs to be investigated, and if the allegations are true, she probably should be fired. However, I like you know nothing about her career up to this point, and she may have a reason for what she did that you and I don't know about.
As a ranking member of my department, we don't need military Rambos waving their guns around banks to prove how tough they are. Maybe that's why the military isn't allowed to perform domestic law enforcement responsibilities.

[BorderRat]

.

[dano1427]

That newspaper story is vague. Was she in the store, out of the store? Is this a large grocery store, smaller store, etc? How did these people know she was a Detective in "plainclothes?"

A few things:
--A robbery in progress call DOES NOT dictate an immediate entry into the building. Any Department that teaches that tactic is asking for problems. Most Departments should have training in place to address perimeters around the building, approaches, Dispatcher call-ins to the business, etc. Any Officer who would blindly run into a business being robbed is a danger to themselves and those they work with. Even with an active shooter based incident, certain immediate protocols are followed, which does not include an army of Police Officers running into the kill zone or worse.
--If she was already in the building, should she have automatically located the two robbers and attempted an apprehension? Don't know...Based upon the story, that doesn't seem to be a sound option.
--The story reads like she did nothing...She could have done much more.

--dan

[3/4s]

When I was in the academy oh so many years ago, a young officer was killed in a bank robbery. He was assigned to the Pct. that adjoins the academy building. He had come into the city to pick up his paycheck and went to a bank a few blocks away to cash it. In front of the bank a citizen came out and said the bank was being robbed. He immedietely drew his weapon, entered the bank and was killed.

The dep`t used to issue a sort of newsletter with the paychecks. The next pay period there was an article from the Commissioner on the proper way to handle off duty situations like this. It stated to either call 911 or have someone call stating a plainclothes officer was on the scene, take a position of cover so you can observe the situation and wait for backup. Even if the BGs get away and no one was harmed, you did your job.

A few months later I was involved in a similar situation. Unlike the movies, people who get shot for being stupid don`t get up after the director yells "cut". Handled correctly, no one gets harmed and the BGs wind up in jail.

[Stump]

I agree 100% with retired. I have been on the other end of the radio listening to off-duties report these types of situations. It happens, and it happens more often than the public knows.
Another thing I'd like to add -- I read the newspaper every day and am amazed at the number of things the media makes up. They call ME for the news, and they take what little my dept is permitted to give them, and they make up their own opinions about the rest to sensationalize it. I am not saying that this woman was correct in what she did, but the media may have it twisted it to make it a little more one-sided.

[BrickCop]

Padres,

My affirmative action comment was because in my experience it is much more likely than not that officers of any gender/race hired under AA have committed a disproportionate amount of f-ups (as to those who were hired based on merit). I didn't label her as a poster child for females not belonging in LE but you did, albeit unintentionally. THIS officer, who happens to be female does NOT belong in LE. Sorry if I'm not politically correct enough for you.

I'm not disputing tactics I am looking at her actions, or lack thereof during and immediately AFTER the robbery. If you zero in solely on her not engaging two armed suspects in a crowded store it is a good decison, I agree 100%. But you have to look at the whole picture (assuming the allegations are true), she made this decison by default not based on a considered response

She is either stupid, a coward or both. At the very least she is incompetent and should be fired .

[J.DIXON]

Let me clarify myself. Running in and trading shots with the perps is what I would do if forced into it. I want to minimize the dangers for the innocents. 1st thing to do is find a covered position where I can see the target building and get the cavalry on the way. IF the situation escalated on the inside,yes I would make entry. I have already identified myself to the dispatcher,height,weight,clothing,etc,so responding units know there is an off duty there. Also before any engagement happens,I will have my badge prominently displayed. Should I have to engage,I will find the best approach to get the drop on the perps. Once I yell Police drop the weapon,if either perp so much as twitches wrong,he gets dropped.

Beanstick: I have to respectfully disagree on one point you made. There is no such thing in my world as a stand off where someone is pointing a gun at me. Once the s**t hits the fan,its go time. I will not give a perp time to put me in that situation. Either you drop him when he makes the gesture,or he drops you. Period. You are already at a tactical disadvantage because of numbers. Once you have committed,there is no time for hesitation. You take the greatist threat first. Remember your training. Noone holds 2 until everyone holds 1. Put 1 bullet (center mass) into every threat,then engage any threat still standing/fighting. Having said that,anyone good enough to shoot once is good enough to shoot several times.

[retired]

Originally posted by J.DIXON
Let me clarify myself. Running in and trading shots with the perps is what I would do if forced into it. I want to minimize the dangers for the innocents. 1st thing to do is find a covered position where I can see the target building and get the cavalry on the way. IF the situation escalated on the inside,yes I would make entry. I have already identified myself to the dispatcher,height,weight,clothing,etc,so responding units know there is an off duty there. Also before any engagement happens,I will have my badge prominently displayed. Should I have to engage,I will find the best approach to get the drop on the perps. Once I yell Police drop the weapon,if either perp so much as twitches wrong,he gets dropped.

Beanstick: I have to respectfully disagree on one point you made. There is no such thing in my world as a stand off where someone is pointing a gun at me. Once the s**t hits the fan,its go time. I will not give a perp time to put me in that situation. Either you drop him when he makes the gesture,or he drops you. Period. You are already at a tactical disadvantage because of numbers. Once you have committed,there is no time for hesitation. You take the greatist threat first. Remember your training. Noone holds 2 until everyone holds 1. Put 1 bullet (center mass) into every threat,then engage any threat still standing/fighting. Having said that,anyone good enough to shoot once is good enough to shoot several times.

How did you identify yourself to dispatch since you are off duty and it is highly unlikely that you are carrying a radio? According to the report, she never saw the suspects, has no idea what they look like, and doesn't even know if they are holding hostages. She was warned by others that a robbery was in progress. She notified a security guard and told someone to call 911. She didn't make the telephone call to report the crime probably because she didn't have any idea what the suspects looked like.

With that said, I disagree with her not staying on top of the situation, and taking control. She is appropriately being investgated by IA. I strongly disagree that she should have in any way confronted the suspects.

I don't know what your department policy is on off duty involvement, but mine is rather clear, you don't get involved unless it is a life or death situation.

Are you telling me that your department policy states that you as a off duty, non-uniformed detective should enter the scene of a bank robbery, confront the supects, rather than wait for the uniformed cops to arrive and take charge of the situation?:confused: What if she had entered the bank with her gun drawn, and and another bank security guard saw her, thought she was another bank robber and shot her? Too many variables for off duty non-uniformed cops to get involved.

[J.DIXON]

In my case,I was speaking hypothetically. I always carry my cell phone with me. For one reason is to have instant access to communications. It is my dept policy that robberies are always given to the on duty units on code (secured scrambled) so that if the perps have a scanner,they won't know we're coming.

[Cop2B]

Witness my ***, the article said she left the scene, and her supervisor ordered her back.

[Chief Wiggum]

Originally posted by Beanstick
I still cant reason why anyone would back this woman up. Endangering civilians? C'mon now, thats another way of saying, "I cant go in there because I might get hurt." Then what is the purpose to have LE around? Why do you think we are issued guns?

Worst case scenario:

She walks into the robbery in progess. The two thugs see her. Hopefully she has her weapon drawned. They point their weapons at her. They are at a stand still. While she has their attention someone calls 911 for help. Minutes later, the whole damn department is there. They can either shoot it out with the police, unlikely, or then notice that they are severly out manned and gunned- they give up.

Either way the good guys win and they demonstrate that they are not going to back down no matter what the situation.

Do you really think she was thinking about the safety of the victims during the robbery while she was paying for her bottled water?

Please dont justify her actions with more BS. If you are a cop, guess what like JD said, you took an OATH. Anyone whos taken the oath can go back and read it again, somewhere in there it says something about " serve and protect" not ignore and hide.

Beanstick, you live in "fantasy land." The scenario you describe would never happen.

If a cop is stupid enough to, as you put it, "walk into the robbery in progress" then he/she is going to get her *** shot off and probably get civilians killed with them.

The armed stand off you described only happens in the movies. In real life the bullets are going to fly and innocents are probably going to get hurt. That being said, this POS detective still had an obligation to engage the suspect(s), just not inside the store.

Maybe I misread but it looked to me like she was on duty when this incident occured (in an unmarked squad car). When your on duty you have a duty to act. You can wait for the robbery to go down and engage the suspects outside (tacticly of course). If marked units are present outside you make sure they don't reenter the store to take hostages. If they get away and you have your unmarked you follow the best you can and get on the radio.

Be tactical in everything you do but sometimes when your out numbered you've still got to act. Sometimes it's just a bad day to be a cop.