Friday, January 18, 2008

Hello? Fifth Amendment?

  • Bond was set at $75,000 on Thursday for a Chicago Police officer charged with aggravated DUI for allegedly crashing his SUV into a car last November, leaving two people dead.

    Cook County Circuit Judge Donald Panarese set bond at $75,000 for [JA], 33, according to Cook County State's Attorney's office spokesman Andy Conklin.

You cannot be compelled to give testimony against yourself in criminal trials. Once you refuse a breath test, the automatic criminal suspension of your license commences. The Department can order you to blow for Administrative Charges, but it has already been recognized by the Supreme Court that this cannot be used against you as it was forced from you.

Unless liberal whack jobs are willing to admit that Burge had it right and "compelled" testimony should be allowed in criminal trials? Someone better put a stop on those check the City just cut.

Labels:

128 Comments:

Anonymous Father Tomasino said...

Any ASA that tries to use a breath test result that was administrative in nature, knowing that such evidence is inadmissible, should be censured by the ARDC. Even police officers have the right to equal protection regardless of what the media whores would like.

1/18/2008 01:34:00 AM  
Anonymous tax payer said...

The Department has supervisors that only focus on how good they can fuck a copper instead of thinking about protecting the city's liability. Jon Loevy; come get your money!

1/18/2008 01:36:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

any chance we will see the FOP growing a set of BALLs anytime soon.

How about a press conference where our President lays it out straight to all those in attendence?

Medication does exist for Testosterone replacement. If you need some I gotta a guy

1/18/2008 01:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The A.S.A. is being pretty slick here. Based on her statement that the State would only using the results to prove the actual level much of been much higher at the time of the accident, is a legal tactic. By ordering the B.A.C. by subpoena at the time the officer was administratively ordered to do so, the State will argue that since that BAC is not the level that the officer was at the time of accident that it is not the BAC the officer refused to take. I know it sounds a little confusing but just follow me a bit.

FOR THE RECORD I AM TOTALLY AGAINST WHAT THE STATE IS DOING.

Lets pretend you were drinking, involved in an accident. You refuse the breath test. While waiting for a transport car to take you to the station, another car comes by and hits you as the officer is walking you while cuffed to the transport car. You are hurt and traken to the hospital. It is standard practice for the E.R. room to run a full blood work up for alcohol and drugs as well as other medical blood tests. They do this so they don't give you a drug in the E.R. that may have a bad interaction with whatever you consumed, smoked or snorted before you arrived.

Now the State can subpoena that blood work up and use it against you even though you refused to take a BAC test to the officers.

My point is that when you are ordered administratively to do anything, it can be obtained by subpoena by the order of the court.

Now even if it gets tossed out, that evidence was made public to possible jury members as well as the judge that may be hearing the trial.

Now if the State argues that the BAC level, although given against the person's wishes, the State will say that the BAC is not directly related to the DUI arrest but evidence obtained hours after the accident due to employment regulations that will demonstrate the BAC at the time of the accident was much higher.

SO the question now arises, in the future, can the department force one to give evidence against oneself or be fired.

My guess is that this will end up in court and the courts will find that one's rights protected under the US Constitution trumps any contractual agreement made by any private parties.
(its late so sorry for any typos)

1/18/2008 02:49:00 AM  
Anonymous communist country we are now said...

WE have ways to make you talk! Now show me your papers!

1/18/2008 02:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now don't blow at all. If you got into a bind. The line is gone, people don't understand this. One accusation and poof job gone, just stay out of prison.

DUI there is a presumption of guilty and you have to prove yourself innocent. Unless, you want to change the law, or maybe it is DUI laws are anti-constitutional. Therefore all DUI cases are illegal.

1/18/2008 03:24:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you are accused of a DUI, job loss is a coming, so don't blow at all. ever. The ASA made it clear. Lesson, don't crash if you'd had even one drink. Or don't drink and drive. Show chicago what is up and start hammering everyone on the DUI. Even for one Drink.

1/18/2008 03:35:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I will not drink in bars anymore, the camera will follow how many drinks you had as a PO, they don't do this to other people, this is great, normal people would have not ever been charged, a PO faces 28 years for an idiot of the other car that blew a stop sign.

1/18/2008 03:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

since the States Attorney's office has now declared war on ALL Chicago Police Officer's, WHY ARE WE STILL PARTICIPATING IN THE UN-MANDATED FELONY REVIEW PROCESS?

1/18/2008 03:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It wasn't the breath test. They are using the information off the black box in his truck. they think they can prove DUI without the breath test.

1/18/2008 04:33:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What's wrong with the female sergeants in 018....."

Follow the formula--

Females like to feel pretty

018 is a pretty district.

The men in 018 are prettier than the women.

Tension ensues.

1/17/2008 07:21:00 PM

I know it's off topic, but this may be the single greatest post ever on this site!!!

1/18/2008 06:37:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey SCC, this is not a so called "liberal whack job" but it is a conservative whack job. Conservatives are the ones who believe in unchecked government powers while liberals believe in the opposite. Also, whenever things go wrong in this world, you blame liberals. You really are a ditto head aren't you?

Now, as for the officer JA being in this predicament. Well he could have avoided it by not being drunk and driving. I am a P.O. and for God's sakes, if you are doing to drink and get really shit faced drunk, then you better have a back up who can drive you home. Isn't that simple? But sometimes P.O.'s will gamble and drink and then drive. Then if they do that, they have to face the consequences. As P.O.'s we always want to preach the merits of personal responsibility and that should include us too!

1/18/2008 06:44:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not sure of the particulars of this case, however, if you are hospitalized at any time after a accident resulting in a death the hospital must, per Illinois law, turn over your BAC to the police.

Please remember this if you ever CHOOSE to go to the hospital to AVOID dealing with the department after a incident

1/18/2008 07:51:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If your drunk don't drive simple as that! Mette goes to jail for nothing this guy belongs in jail drunken idiot! no fund raiser for him!

1/18/2008 08:05:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From what I heard he had the right of way! Oh yeah thats right he's a cop so of course he's wrong! What was I thinking? Thanks Abate!

1/18/2008 08:11:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah, whats the problem? he didn't fail a test showing he was drunk. so that means you can't prove anything so move on. just a couple of kids died. hell, they were gonna die of something anyway. would love to see your response if an alleged drunk driver killed an on duty cop in an accident.

1/18/2008 08:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has Burge ever been convicted of anything? There is no evidence of this alleged torture. All you have is self serving statements from convicted murderers who now have millions of tax payer dollars. SCC I would expect that from the media and our candidates for SA but from you come on.

Area 2 Detective

1/18/2008 08:26:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I agree with the statement that the breath test should be inadmissable in a criminal trial. Can we leave this kid alone and not post anything more about this?
The PO has gone through enough and believe it or not, shitbirds read this blog.

1/18/2008 08:45:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry for JA but this has to play out. Seems we have an over zealous ASA who's trying to make points during an election year knowing the supreme court through out compelled evidence. Is this not malicious prosecution just like Nifong and the Lacrosse team?

1/18/2008 08:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

C'mon SCC you know cops have no rights anymore. No contract either.

1/18/2008 10:28:00 AM  
Blogger flyonthewall said...

According to a news report I saw, he refused the breathylzer but was "ordered" to blow by a ranking police officer? It was then reported, he was not "intoxicated", but he's been charged anyway. Anyone can confirm this? Interesting story to watch..

1/18/2008 10:29:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sounds more like JA will be GETTING PAID, B*TCHES!!!!!!

1/18/2008 10:30:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Once you refuse a breath test, the automatic criminal suspension of your license commences"

Actually the courts here hold that the SOS suspension is not a criminal charge.Only the actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under an intoxicating compound is criminal.

Illinois Supreme Court recently held that a summary suspension is not punishment and therefore does not violate the double jeopardy clauses of the Illinois or U.S. Constitutions. People v Lavariega, 175 Ill 2d 153, 676 NE2d 643 (1997).

1/18/2008 10:49:00 AM  
Blogger sharky said...

Late breaking news:

John Stroger dead at 0800 hrs, per Scum Times website

1/18/2008 11:06:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think I'll set my ass down and have a nice bowl of cereal. While I shop ebay.

1/18/2008 11:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fifth Amendment applies to confessions or other "testimony."

This is actually a Fourth Amendment violation because the police took evidence from the officer without a search warrant.

The same applies if you refuse a DNA swab. The police need to get a search warrant to take that evidence. Taking the evidence without consent or a warrant is an unlawful seizure.

The real question is who has to pay the officer.

The ASA didn't actually seize the evidence and besides they are covered with their prosecutorial immunity. The Lieutenant is screwed because it could be argued he seized the evidence for use in a criminal trial under the guise that the evidence was only for an administrative purpose. Police don't have immunity.

The ASA at the bond hearing could still be disciplined by the ARDC, since she used evidence for the purpose of obtaining a high bond knowing the evidence was illegally obtained.

Since the ASA at the bond hearing is near the bottom of the food chain, the officer could possibly use the disciplinary complaint to cut her throat. With her throat cut, she might be more inclined to give up discussions that may have occurred in the upper levels of the ASA's office regarding this case.

1/18/2008 11:16:00 AM  
Blogger SCC said...

Hey SCC,

yes?

this is not a so called "liberal whack job" but it is a conservative whack job.

uh...asshole says what??

Conservatives are the ones who believe in unchecked government powers while liberals believe in the opposite.

Are you some kind of fucking moron? Conservatives believe what now? Correction - you ARE some kind of fucking moron. Probably the most complete moron we've ever encountered. Conservatives, true conservatives, believe that government should be small, unobtrusive and tightly controlled by the people. Low taxes, personal freedom and responsibility, free market economics unhindered by government control. Liberals believe in complete control of the individual: cradle-to-grave welfare, social program handouts, raised taxes, government control of industry, banning firearms, legislating personal morals, "it-takes-a-village" bullshit. Any of this ringing a bell in your tiny little brain?

Also, whenever things go wrong in this world, you blame liberals. You really are a ditto head aren't you?

Again, for the record, we'ven ever have listened to Limbaugh, never bought his books, never gave him a dime directly or indirectly. And as a semi literate member of the human race, we've managed to form our own worldview.

Now, as for the officer JA being in this predicament. Well he could have avoided it by not being drunk and driving.

Duh. That's not the argument at hand numbnuts

I am a P.O. and for God's sakes, if you are doing to drink and get really shit faced drunk, then you better have a back up who can drive you home. Isn't that simple? But sometimes P.O.'s will gamble and drink and then drive.

Again, duh. With intellect like this, why aren't you a brain surgeon?

Then if they do that, they have to face the consequences. As P.O.'s we always want to preach the merits of personal responsibility and that should include us too!

Ah, but the rest of the citizens of the United States of America don't have to provide the very evidence that will convict them. You don't see Drew Peterson digging up his wife's body, do you? You didn't see OJ taking the stand to defend cutting two people's throats, did you?

YOU CANNOT USE EVIDENCE THAT IS COMPELLED BY THREATS AGAINST YOUR CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS!

It's called Garrity Rights and they are established case law by the United States Supreme Court.

Now go get your shine box you liberal handjob

1/18/2008 12:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

maiu looked very carefully at this and could find no evidence to support agg dui. the other driver was dui, did not stop at stop sign and did not have right of way. if you are not the proximate cause of the crash, you are not charged... unless you are the police.

1/18/2008 12:11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Head of felony review did not want to charge. It went to Milan and Devine, they both wanted to charge. Remember, Milan is running for state's attorney and needs to score political points.

1/18/2008 12:12:00 PM  
Anonymous freedoms? said...

"Conservatives, true conservatives, believe that government should be small, unobtrusive and tightly controlled by the people. Low taxes, personal freedom and responsibility, free market economics unhindered by government control."

Does this mean that you are for the repeal of the Prohibition laws concerning controlled substances?

And, does this mean that Ronald Reagan's 'war on drugs' is proof that he was, in reality, not a conservative?

1/18/2008 12:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Fifth Amendment protects you against self-incrimination in a criminal trial.

It does not protect you from losing a license, or a job.

The State can force you to make that choice. And they don't just do it to police officers.

A common tactic of the I.R.S., for instance, lets them: (1) go after you criminally, while, at the same time, (2) assess civil penalties and fines in a separate proceeding.

If you don't testify in the civil proceeding, they can hold it against you, and you lose. If you do testify, they can use it against you in the criminal case.

Burge learned that in the case against him. He didn't testify,pleading the Fifth, so he was looking at a jury being told that he refused to testify, and that they could hold that against him.

Yeah, it s*cks. But it's not just police officers who get hit with this.

1/18/2008 12:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now, as for the officer JA being in this predicament. Well he could have avoided it by not being drunk and driving. I am a P.O. and for God's sakes, if you are doing to drink and get really shit faced drunk, then you better have a back up who can drive you home. Isn't that simple? But sometimes P.O.'s will gamble and drink and then drive. Then if they do that, they have to face the consequences. As P.O.'s we always want to preach the merits of personal responsibility and that should include us too!

1/18/2008 06:44:00 AM

Shut up!

1/18/2008 12:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Milan will hopefully end up like Mike Nifong..

1/18/2008 01:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. Milan,

I am a supervisor in a gentrifying district heavily populated with trendy nightclubs that on any given night might have little gatherings of ASA'S who are drinking. I also happen to have more than a few expert DUI writers on my log who would be more than willing to return your favor by fully enforcing DUI laws against your minimum wage Irish attorneys. I was incensed when ASA Jane Sax was 501'ed by the dimwit in 012 for what was essentially a fender bender. There were others ways to handle the incident; however, descretion is a two way street and you and your's had never, ever, drive the wrong way down that street. I would anticipate a refusal to blow from your minion's but they can still expect to be charged. And oh that call to news affairs and maybe an anonymous call to the press. Or maybe the other party will simply be informed that the intoxicated driver responsible for this accident is an ASA! This is about sandbagging for political expedience you dirtbag, not doing the right thing when required. But you might lose the votes of illegal Mexicans if you did the right thing you panderer.

1/18/2008 01:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Off topic:

Attorneys drop wrongful death suit against Chicago, officer
Tribune staff report
January 18, 2008

Attorneys representing the family of a man who was shot and killed by an off-duty Chicago police officer in April 2006 have dropped a wrongful death suit against the city and the officer.

Officer Edward Yerke fatally shot Demetri Centera, 31, and his friend, Kenneth Elrod, after a dispute at a Northwest Side bar. The Police Department cleared the officer of wrongdoing.

The Loevy & Loevy law firm declined to comment Thursday on why the Centera suit was dropped. A suit over Elrod's death, filed by another law firm, remains pending.

ARE THEY FINALLY ADMITTING THEY WERE WRONG????

1/18/2008 02:02:00 PM  
Anonymous dilligaf said...

My only question regarding Garrity Rights is, using this incident as an example, following an order (or lose your job) to blow, considered a statement? Doing a little reading up on the matter, Garrity seems to only apply to an officer's protection against self incrimination. Are physical actions an officer may be ordered to do adminstratively protected too?

1/18/2008 02:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

according to the trib the only thing the po was charged with was speeding--they couldnt prove dui because after he blew administratively he blew under .08-of course the trib, points out that it was 8 hours latter

1/18/2008 02:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...The Lieutenant is screwed because it could be argued he seized the evidence for use in a criminal trial under the guise that the evidence was only for an administrative purpose. Police don't have immunity...

Sorry, but unless it can be PROVED that the Lieutenant acted with extreme negligence or ordered the tests with malicious intent and lied, he does have qualified immunity, especially since the procedures are spelled out in our orders.

1/18/2008 02:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey 6:44am, I cant name one conservative that's trying to take my guns. Liberals are cowards in that they refuse to jail/slaughter
the dregs of society that are causing all the crime. So they take the commie loser approach and ban everyones guns. I was treated better in the Army where I supposedly had no rights!
ITS LIKE ABORTIONS, IF U DONT WANT
A GUN THEN DONT HAVE ONE....

1/18/2008 02:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not to be one of those people but...
it won't go anywhere. I'm a D.U.I guy and if what I read here is what they have on him it is an extremely weak case and although it seems that the ASA is coming from all directions with "evidence" there are DUI attorneys that can easily disprove it. Regardless save yourself the hassle and embarrassment and take a cab....and that goes for everyone not just the police, seeing the other driver bac was way over.

1/18/2008 03:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Breath tests are non-testimonial. Therefore, it is not a fifth amendment issue.

1/18/2008 03:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Once you refuse a breath test, the automatic criminal suspension of your license commences" People v Lavariega, 175 Ill 2d 153, 676 NE2d 643 (1997).

1/18/2008 10:49:00 AM

Suspension only occurs if implied consent rights are given prior to breath test and after arrest. Probable cause first then arrest then implied consent. Officer was not given rights but ordered to take test. Results used in criminal charge. Violation of garrity law. What was the probable cause for the arrest? He was charged with felony DUI. Did anyone perform field sobriety test? He waited 91/2 hours before breath test. Must have been a lot of confusion among bosses. Who made the actual arrest for DUI? Who will testify at probable cause hearing? This will be a very interesting case to follow.

1/18/2008 03:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are you some kind of fucking moron? Conservatives believe what now? Correction - you ARE some kind of fucking moron. Probably the most complete moron we've ever encountered. Conservatives, true conservatives, believe that government should be small, unobtrusive and tightly controlled by the people. Low taxes, personal freedom and responsibility, free market economics unhindered by government control. Liberals believe in complete control of the individual: cradle-to-grave welfare, social program handouts, raised taxes, government control of industry, banning firearms, legislating personal morals, "it-takes-a-village" bullshit. Any of this ringing a bell in your tiny little brain?
--------------------------------

ahahahahaha Scc and his politics again! Unfortunately for you SCC, the type of conservative you've described does not exist anymore! Conservatives now-a-days are for big government, more rules/regulations/government control, less individual freedom, more, ignorance of the peoples voice, more influence of the economy, etc etc.. I doesn't end there. I can go on forever. Go ahead, vote for Mike Hucklebee, Mitt Romeny or John McCain. Be my ignorant guest!

1/18/2008 03:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not sure of the particulars of this case, however, if you are hospitalized at any time after a accident resulting in a death the hospital must, per Illinois law, turn over your BAC to the police.

Please remember this if you ever CHOOSE to go to the hospital to AVOID dealing with the department after a incident

1/18/2008 07:51:00 AM

fyi.. some hospitals such as christ have refused to do the tests unless the patient is admitted and the blood is necessary for their treatment. we brought the street deputy out and the ads' response was that we are not ready as an organization to prosecute dr's for failing to do this, sounds like ipra's response to prosecuting people who are filing false affidavits...
it's funny how the letter of the law applies to all police but not to all citizens. as long as the attitude by those in charge is to "fuck" the police our dept. will continue to be riddled with scandal due to the frustration our officers are starting to feel for the lack of appreciation.
This job is filled with 90% great people, 5% total fuck ups, and 5% shameless self promoters. the problem is that most of the 5% self promoters are in charge.
Good luck and be careful!!!!

1/18/2008 03:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once again very unfortunate accident. Please go straight home after your shift. Drink at home with friends. It is safer and cheaper. There are plenty of drunks out on the street when the bars close down and the risk of being hit by one is not worth losing your career.

Media loves to feature officers doing anything wrong these days so don't be your own worse enemy.

1/18/2008 04:26:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah, whats the problem? he didn't fail a test showing he was drunk. so that means you can't prove anything so move on. just a couple of kids died. hell, they were gonna die of something anyway. would love to see your response if an alleged drunk driver killed an on duty cop in an accident.

1/18/2008 08:14:00 AM

It has happened fool!
You have an expectation of the right of way on a main st. such as Damen, the other car blew the stop sign and was drinking as well,per independant witnesses. You make the illegal traffic move but all cops are the assholes for pulling you over. Too bad you hate all cops. Do us a favor never call when you need something.

1/18/2008 04:28:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where is the FOP.

Presently fighting the use of administrative results being used against a police officer are three southside attorneys. Byron Bradley ex p/o, ex Area 2 dick and Frank and Mike Carey, (dad was a p/o started a police assoc in 1966, OW
tried to fire, brothers a retired copper five family members on job)

A 009th district copper refused to blow in presence of attorney, ordered by Sgt. Bob Milan and Company lost motion in traffic court when judge ruled that administrative rights could not be used in traffic court. Milan and Company presently appealing to the appealate court.

No where was the fraternal order of alcoholics/patronage hacks involved.

My advice is always have a private attorney card in your wallet and call immediately when your takken into the station. Use your contitutional rights, remain silent and the supervisor is not your friend, the majority of all sergeants in good districts are all merit, and will walk all over a police officer.

An attorney is going to charge you five hundred dollars to respond to the station but it is well worth it, the wait alone helps and it makes the white shirts pucker up.

Place one uniforn check aside for competent legal representation, not Mark @ Minnie from the FOP.

Now is the time for a job action like in the late eighties. No tickets no arrests f the police administration and the union.

Please forgive the misspellings I have five months to go until I'm through.

1/18/2008 04:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sounds more like JA will be GETTING PAID, B*TCHES!!!!!!

1/18/2008 10:30:00 AM



comment from a shithead?

1/18/2008 04:33:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Department has supervisors that only focus on how good they can fuck a copper instead of thinking about protecting the city's liability. Jon Loevy; come get your money!

1/18/2008 01:36:00 AM


You will always be ordered to blow administratively, regardless. Your attorney will tell you it's OK. I don't need an attorney, I'm not blowing! Fire me, take this job and shove it, I'll find another.

1/18/2008 04:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, but the rest of the citizens of the United States of America don't have to provide the very evidence that will convict them. You don't see Drew Peterson digging up his wife's body, do you? You didn't see OJ taking the stand to defend cutting two people's throats, did you?

YOU CANNOT USE EVIDENCE THAT IS COMPELLED BY THREATS AGAINST YOUR CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS!-------------------

Wrong SCC. They can and have. While I agree we have less rights than the general poublic, there is case law in place that has already been used against a former 018th district officer in a criminal trial. Breathalizers are not testimony and not subject to the 5th amendment. Also, it can be argued that you can refuse to take the breathalizer with out the fear of being "immediately" fired. While we all know that you will probably be fired down the line for a refusal, the fact that there is a process with hearings before you might be terminated does away with the threat issue in the eyes of the court.

I wouldn't have believed it either if I had not seen it with my own eyes. Officers just need to be aware that the administrative blow is not seperate from your criminal case and make the decision to blow or not based on that knowledge. Better yet, don't drink and drive.

1/18/2008 05:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Mike, nice catch on the Kennedy.

1/18/2008 05:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"since the States Attorney's office has now declared war on ALL Chicago Police Officer's, WHY ARE WE STILL PARTICIPATING IN THE UN-MANDATED FELONY REVIEW PROCESS?"

Why are we still drinking and driving???!!! Asshat!!!

1/18/2008 06:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"any chance we will see the FOP growing a set of BALLs anytime soon.

How about a press conference where our President lays it out straight to all those in attendence?

Medication does exist for Testosterone replacement. If you need some I gotta a guy"

The FOP already posted their response in the monthly newsletter.
Read your mail...another Asshat!!!

1/18/2008 06:07:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't believe the judge gave Sgt. John Herman 25 fuckin' years . The victim who now lives out of state said, she has nightmares about the night she was raped . I think she has day dreams about all the fuckin' $$$$$$ she is going to get from the city. I wonder how much coke she can fit up her nose .

1/18/2008 06:56:00 PM  
Blogger Murphy40Pct said...

Have any other POs or Detectives had problems with A.S.A. House? I have now had 3 experiences with her and believe her to be the most anti-police ASA at Felony Review I or any co-worker can remember in recent history. The daughter of a clout heavy judge, she will demand any and everything possible on the most straightforward case to reject it-although it seems she may now be favoring C.I.ing cases for trivial reasons so that the case will be handled when she is off. Does anyone know what sort of recourse can be taken against the worst ASA presently at Felony Review?

1/18/2008 07:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now go get your shine box you liberal handjob

1/18/2008 12:05:00 PM

Now thats funny! What a wack job.

1/18/2008 08:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We REALLY don't have any rights working for the Crook County Commie-crats.

1/18/2008 08:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is time for the young officers of the department to get together and get rid of the FOP once and for all. They have been pulling the carrot-and-stick routine with us for over 20 years. We used to at least be able to stay a half-step ahead of the bill collectors, but this is no longer possible thanks to the always routine, and crap raises we get. We are way behind the times. Even the small suburbs make as much or more than we do.

1/18/2008 08:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Milan will announce indictments right before the election to make himself look tough on cops, beware, they are coming.

1/18/2008 08:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just don't DO ANYTHING if you even think there's a possibility of getting beefed for it. Play it safe, better than getting screwed in this day and age.

1/18/2008 08:37:00 PM  
Anonymous grimreaper said...

ANTHONY PERAICA for States Attorney, the best! VOTE REPUBLICAN!

1/18/2008 08:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

being a policeman, you are held to a higher standard. some people just need alittle reminder now and then.....it's really hard to find another job after 50.

1/18/2008 08:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ANTHONY PERAICA for States Attorney, the best! VOTE REPUBLICAN!

actually met him a few times and he was a nice guy

1/18/2008 09:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Loser says:

any chance we will see the FOP growing a set of BALLs anytime soon.

How about a press conference where our President lays it out straight to all those in attendence?

Medication does exist for Testosterone replacement. If you need some I gotta a guy

1/18/2008 01:39:00 AM

Bright Light says:

Great idea! A news conference!! Hell, yeah. Donahue can "lay it out straight" for everyone that Chicago cops can drive drunk and kill innocents without retribution. That'll go over great. I have a better idea: Donohue can stay quiet on an issue that can never ever be won in the court of public opinion/news media and instead have his lawyers submit briefs to defend our position that we should be treated like anyone else when it comes to DUI breath testing. What's that, you say? Donohue has already done this? Yes. And we (the police)won.

So shut your fucking yapper and go wash your vagina. If you need estrogen replacement therapy or some more maxipads, I got a guy.

1/18/2008 09:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't believe the judge gave Sgt. John Herman 25 fuckin' years . The victim who now lives out of state said, she has nightmares about the night she was raped . I think she has day dreams about all the fuckin' $$$$$$ she is going to get from the city. I wonder how much coke she can fit up her nose .
----------------------------------
note to self....if u lie with dogs u get flees

1/18/2008 09:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

don't drink n' drive but...what goes around comes around, if u catch my drift.

1/18/2008 09:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is this not malicious prosecution just like Nifong and the Lacrosse team?

1/18/2008 08:53:00

No, it is not the same. Two dead innocents is nothing like a stripper crying rape against a bunch of millionaire frat boys. Grow up.

1/18/2008 09:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The following is pure bullshit posted by a retard:

Fifth Amendment applies to confessions or other "testimony."

This is actually a Fourth Amendment violation because the police took evidence from the officer without a search warrant.

The same applies if you refuse a DNA swab. The police need to get a search warrant to take that evidence. Taking the evidence without consent or a warrant is an unlawful seizure.

The real question is who has to pay the officer.

The ASA didn't actually seize the evidence and besides they are covered with their prosecutorial immunity. The Lieutenant is screwed because it could be argued he seized the evidence for use in a criminal trial under the guise that the evidence was only for an administrative purpose. Police don't have immunity.

The ASA at the bond hearing could still be disciplined by the ARDC, since she used evidence for the purpose of obtaining a high bond knowing the evidence was illegally obtained.

Since the ASA at the bond hearing is near the bottom of the food chain, the officer could possibly use the disciplinary complaint to cut her throat. With her throat cut, she might be more inclined to give up discussions that may have occurred in the upper levels of the ASA's office regarding this case.

1/18/2008 11:16:00 AM

*********************************

Listen up, jailhouse lawyer moron that dream of "cutting the throat" of a state's attorney, you are talking out your ass. EVERYTHING you said is wrong. SCC, posting shit like this and the opinions of all the other retards that think they can refuse direct orders should never be posted. These posts endanger our low IQ readers.

1/18/2008 09:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what sort of recourse can be taken against the worst ASA presently at Felony Review?

1/18/2008 07:14:00 PM

-----------------------------------

Don't make any arrests...period. That's what the libs, revs, alderscums, mayor, media, etc. wants. AND we have no contract. Show up for 8 and that's it. By the way, that is hard for me to say and act upon since I am a dic and make arrests and call felony review a lot. But forget it. Plan B is to go through the motions, get the disapproval and tell the victim the ASA won't approve charges Release WOC and and give the victim the name of the ASA who disapproved the charges and the CC State's Attorney's phone number so that they can beef to the felony review supervisor.

1/18/2008 09:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where is the FOP.

Presently fighting the use of administrative results being used against a police officer are three southside attorneys. Byron Bradley ex p/o, ex Area 2 dick and Frank and Mike Carey, (dad was a p/o started a police assoc in 1966, OW
tried to fire, brothers a retired copper five family members on job)

A 009th district copper refused to blow in presence of attorney, ordered by Sgt. Bob Milan and Company lost motion in traffic court when judge ruled that administrative rights could not be used in traffic court. Milan and Company presently appealing to the appealate court.

No where was the fraternal order of alcoholics/patronage hacks involved.

*************

You dumb fucker. Haul your sorry ass over to the FOP and ask to see the brief that was filed in that case. It was written at FOP and given to those lawyers to protect our members. Ask them. In particular, ask Byron. Better yet, ask Kevin. Then, if you are half a man, post an apology to the FOP. Don't talk about shit you know nothing about.

1/18/2008 09:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Place one uniforn check aside for competent legal representation, not Mark @ Minnie from the FOP.

Now is the time for a job action like in the late eighties. No tickets no arrests f the police administration and the union.

Please forgive the misspellings I have five months to go until I'm through.

1/18/2008 04:32:00 PM

Hello Asshole. Ask Kevin (defendant) where the winning legal argument came from. He won't lie. It came from FOP, you piece of shit. I hope your ignorant post doesn't turn the Lodge against Kevin. Smooth move, Ex-lax.

1/18/2008 09:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is time for the young officers of the department to get together and get rid of the FOP once and for all. They have been pulling the carrot-and-stick routine with us for over 20 years. We used to at least be able to stay a half-step ahead of the bill collectors, but this is no longer possible thanks to the always routine, and crap raises we get. We are way behind the times. Even the small suburbs make as much or more than we do.

1/18/2008 08:31:00 PM

Really?...... then name a few and post their CBA's. We all want to know. Since you can't/won't do that, why not quit and take your large ass to a small suburb.

1/18/2008 09:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

since the States Attorney's office has now declared war on ALL Chicago Police Officer's, WHY ARE WE STILL PARTICIPATING IN THE UN-MANDATED FELONY REVIEW PROCESS?

1/18/2008 03:56:00 AM

Wrong question! Right question is, WHY ARE YOU LOCKING ANYONE UP?

1/18/2008 09:45:00 PM  
Blogger SCC said...

Listen up, jailhouse lawyer moron that dream of "cutting the throat" of a state's attorney, you are talking out your ass. EVERYTHING you said is wrong. SCC, posting shit like this and the opinions of all the other retards that think they can refuse direct orders should never be posted. These posts endanger our low IQ readers.

We read the "cut her throat" as a poorly written "cutting her off at the knees" or "stringing her up by her own actions" analogy. There's no threat to the well being of the ASA.

As for "retards that think they can refuse direct orders should never be posted," what country are you typing from? Any Chicago Police Officer can refuse any order they want - they just have to be aware of the consequences which have always included separation.

But it's still a choice.

1/18/2008 09:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCC, it is time for you to endorse a candidate for states attorney.

Alvarez and Milan are NO votes people.

1/18/2008 09:55:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greetings SCC & All Readers,

Do you know Harold Brown? He's retired and running for FOP trustee. He was collecting a disability pension for years from our woefully underfunded pension fund. Poor Harold, disabled Harold. Then Harold turned 63, was mandatorily retired, and something truly magical happened. Harold was suddenly able to start work at Harold Washington college. Harold's job included participating in "police scenarios" jumping in and out of squad cars. He is perfectly able to do this now that he is "retired", but yet he could not take a light duty desk position with CPD? No. Harold Brown had to chew up our endangered pension money claiming he was "disabled" for the better part of ten years. Ladies and Gents, please quiz Harold Brown about his disability and subsequent employment if you ever get a chance to meet this asshole. DO NOT VOTE FOR HAROLD BROWN. He's had enough of our money!! (Harold, if you are reading, and I know you are, feel free to explain. I'll wait.)

1/18/2008 09:58:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is a clear violation of Federal Law. The Garrity Rule prohibits this type of BS from occurring.

The CPD has fired good and honest officers in the past who exercised their rights.

Where is the FOP? This will set very very dangerous precedent if not stopped.

1/18/2008 10:12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 1/18/2008 02:49:00 AM

What the fuck are you talking about?

"Now even if it gets tossed out, that evidence was made public to possible jury members as well as the judge that may be hearing the trial."

Are you a fucking moron or what. Lay off the booze.

1/18/2008 10:28:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To "since the States Attorney's office has now declared war on ALL Chicago Police Officer's, WHY ARE WE STILL PARTICIPATING IN THE UN-MANDATED FELONY REVIEW PROCESS"?

1/18/2008 03:56:00 AM

You don't get the case into court without an ASA approving felony charges you dick head. Now go get your fucking shinebox.

1/18/2008 10:34:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
It is time for the young officers of the department to get together and get rid of the FOP once and for all. They have been pulling the carrot-and-stick routine with us for over 20 years. We used to at least be able to stay a half-step ahead of the bill collectors, but this is no longer possible thanks to the always routine, and crap raises we get. We are way behind the times. Even the small suburbs make as much or more than we do.

1/18/2008 08:31:00 PM

Go work for the small burbs and show this dept what a shit one it is bye!

1/18/2008 10:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ja good luck! wrong place, wrong time, forget the job. just stay out of jail. i would have refused all the way around.

1/18/2008 11:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you are involved in a fender bender with injuries while drinking and still conscious while
removed to the hospital, you can REFUSE ANY NEEDLES. Don't let them poke you with anything, hold back your tears til the next day when you're sober. The hospital can however poke you with a needle and draw blood if you are unconscious which at that point you may have more on your plate to deal with than just a dui.

1/18/2008 11:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If this happens, DONT BLOW. You will get fired. And, if you have little disciplinary history, you will be re-hired after you sue the city.

1/19/2008 12:30:00 AM  
Blogger It's Not All Real said...

Most of you sound like asshats to the non police public who read this blog.

If he was drunk, he should be charged with DUI. Obviously they cannot use an administrative test result in the criminal case, and if they try, the SA's office should be put down. The copper deserves the same treatment as anyone does.

But please don't talk about any kind of miscarriage of justice or any of that other bullshit. Although the accident was probably not the coppers fault, he had no business driving drunk. Criminally he would probably beat the case, but administratively he's looking at 30 days or better.

Bottom line: If you drink, don't drive, PERIOD. This includes law enforcement personnel especially, because we don't walk on water.

1/19/2008 03:25:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...

since the States Attorney's office has now declared war on ALL Chicago Police Officer's, WHY ARE WE STILL PARTICIPATING IN THE UN-MANDATED FELONY REVIEW PROCESS?

1/18/2008 03:56:00 AM

Wrong question! Right question is, WHY ARE YOU LOCKING ANYONE UP?

1/18/2008 09:45:00 PM

I'll remember that next time your mother is a victim. I wonder how you'd feel then if the Police refused service?

1/19/2008 06:16:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is this not malicious prosecution just like Nifong and the Lacrosse team?

1/18/2008 08:53:00

No, it is not the same. Two dead innocents is nothing like a stripper crying rape against a bunch of millionaire frat boys. Grow up.

1/18/2008 09:17:00 PM

Hey, Jerk-Off, the dead driver was DUI AND AT FAULT!! Not condoning the Officer being DUI, but you make it sound like the Officer drove on the sidewalk and killed 2 kids walking to the store. The dead driver was legally drunk, and failed to yield the right-of-way being that he was entering Damen from a side street, thus he was WRONG! If the Officer was stone sober, the results may have been the same because the other driver entered Damen when it was not safe.

1/19/2008 10:33:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't drink and drive ever, call a friend, the police district to send a car, a cab just do not drive, for your safety and the safety of others! If he was not drinking this would of been just a tragic "accident", no job loss, no loss just insurance and lawsuits if he was wrong in the first place!

1/19/2008 10:42:00 AM  
Anonymous "THE BOSS" said...

The solution is very simple....
DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE. THERE ARE NO PROTECTIONS OUT THERE FOR US WHEN WE FUCK UP.

1/19/2008 10:55:00 AM  
Anonymous if all was perfect said...

An attorney is going to charge you five hundred dollars to respond to the station but it is well worth it, the wait alone helps and it makes the white shirts pucker up.



Administrative proceedings means the white shirt dont have to sit and wait for your attorney. they can proceed. you say no, insubordination follows and you are screwed more than the criminal trial, as far as keeping this job.

1/19/2008 11:55:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

keep your mouths shut. we are our worst enemies

1/19/2008 12:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what sort of recourse can be taken against the worst ASA presently at Felony Review?

-----------------

Request an over-ride for every one of her rejections.

The C/I's, those you just have to do.

Put her name all over your sup report. Statements she made in quotations, comments she made, questions she asked victims, changes in her reasons for the C/I. Make it clear that she is not approving the charge, she is really running the investigation. Why?

1- she could get called to the trial. Remember, she doesn't get overtime.

2 - she loses prosecutorial immunity in the case of a lawsuit when she participates in the investigation. She'll pick up on that if she ever reads your report.

1/19/2008 12:53:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What about the two in the other vehicle? What was their BAC? We never her anything about how they did not give the right of way and caused the accident. One way anti police media b.s.

1/19/2008 02:06:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You don't get the case into court without an ASA approving felony charges you dick head. Now go get your fucking shinebox.
-------------------------------------
OH WELL!

1/19/2008 04:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fact is... admin rights were given to the P.O. AFTER he invoked his MIRANDA. Seems to me that once you are given your criminal rights, it's over. I don't think they can order you to talk after MIRANDA. If that's the case then anything after MIRANDA, including BAC is "fruits of poisonous tree". For this and other reasons,charges will be dropped. I predict that this kid will be back on the job eventually.

1/19/2008 04:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When you get an overide, the file gets a big red check mark on it to id it as a overide. When the court ASA sees this, the case gets dropped. They don't care. Overide all you want. It's a joke.

1/19/2008 04:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
To "since the States Attorney's office has now declared war on ALL Chicago Police Officer's, WHY ARE WE STILL PARTICIPATING IN THE UN-MANDATED FELONY REVIEW PROCESS"?

1/18/2008 03:56:00 AM

You don't get the case into court without an ASA approving felony charges you dick head. Now go get your fucking shinebox.

1/18/2008 10:34:00 PM

Uh.... ascruse me there slick sleeve.........While you were in pre-school we didn't have felony review. When the arrestee was charged by the W/C he went to court on the felony charge. WE ARE THE ONLY JURISDICTION WHO UES THE FELONY REVIEW PROCESS. It is entirely self-imposed. Now go get that shine-box

1/19/2008 05:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's Not All Real said...
Most of you sound like asshats to the non police public who read this blog.

If he was drunk, he should be charged with DUI. Obviously they cannot use an administrative test result in the criminal case, and if they try, the SA's office should be put down. The copper deserves the same treatment as anyone does.

But please don't talk about any kind of miscarriage of justice or any of that other bullshit. Although the accident was probably not the coppers fault, he had no business driving drunk. Criminally he would probably beat the case, but administratively he's looking at 30 days or better.

Bottom line: If you drink, don't drive, PERIOD. This includes law enforcement personnel especially, because we don't walk on water.

1/19/2008 03:25:00 AM

He wasnt proven of anything you asshole, only of being the police which equals an automatic guilty in this county and this city.....so go fuck yourself! Next time you leave a wedding or a baptism party, or promotion party after having one beer or hell, even a glass of wine with dinner, remember YOU TOO are breaking the law, consumption of alcohol by an officer whether on or off duty!! Hopefully someone will show you the courtesy and mercy that was not shown this PO if you ever step on your dick. Todays day and time, probaly not.

1/19/2008 06:21:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TO:

Does anyone know what sort of recourse can be taken against the worst ASA presently at Felony Review?

Request an over-ride for every one of her rejections.

1- she could get called to the trial. Remember, she doesn't get overtime.

2 - she loses prosecutorial immunity in the case of a lawsuit when she participates in the investigation. She'll pick up on that if she ever reads your report.

-----------------------------------

You are another clueless fucking idiot. Read the law on immunity before you run shit out of your mouth. Request an override on every case? Go fuck yourself and learn how to be a detective. The D Division is the laziest bunch of pricks in the police department. You assclowns couldn't solve a juvenile stealing candy out of a store. Fuck you.

1/19/2008 07:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once you refuse a breath test, the automatic criminal suspension of your license commences. The Department can order you to blow for Administrative Charges, but it has already been recognized by the Supreme Court that this cannot be used against you as it was forced from you.

Unless liberal whack jobs are admit that Burge had it right and "compelled" testimony should be allowed in criminal trials? Someone better put a stop on those check the City just cut.

************

Dear SCC, love ya but gots to tell ya that you are wrong on this post.
1. The immediate suspension that results from a refusal is NOT a criminal penalty. It's administrative. Remember, driving is a privilege, not a right.
2. You characterization of what the Supreme Court has done is wrong because the law on the subject is really in a state of change heading toward admissibility at all costs.
3. It is not the liberal whack jobs that are tearing down the Bill of Rights. De sure, it is your crew. If this case gets to the Supreme Court, it will be Scalia, Thomas, Alito etc. that will vote in favor of admissibility. Check your history on who gave us all these equal protection and due process rights. It was the courts controlled by "liberal whack jobs." That said, it's time for me to give myself a liberal whack job.

1/19/2008 08:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If he is convicted based on the Administrative blow. it will be overturned in appeals. Administratively, you cannot refuse and by admitting this in court, it violayes his 5th Amendment Rights. I hope the attorney files a motion to suppress the blow based on violation of his 5th Amendment rights in that he was not afforded the same protection as Joe Citizen.

1/19/2008 09:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In my 25 years on I have lost count of the many times I have stopped a Cook County ASA and let the drunken States Attorney go or took them home myself after they flopped their States Attorney badge and ID at me mumbling drunkenly "I'm one of you, we back you guys up."

Oh yeah, well I guess now all bets are off, no more fucking breaks for States Attorneys on the street, that's for fucking goddamn sure. The most recent for me was last week near Area 3, not drunk, just a mover, the ASA got the usual break afforded to ASA's and off duty PO's.

No more breaks for ASA's, that's for damn sure.

1/19/2008 09:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...Next time you leave a wedding or a baptism party, or promotion party after having one beer or hell, even a glass of wine with dinner, remember YOU TOO are breaking the law, consumption of alcohol by an officer whether on or off duty!!...

No, it's not a LAW. And no, the orders don't say you can't drink, it says you cannot be inebriated. Huge difference.

1/19/2008 11:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...WE ARE THE ONLY JURISDICTION WHO UES THE FELONY REVIEW PROCESS...

Sorry Charlie- no we're not.

1/19/2008 11:03:00 PM  
Anonymous You Know Who said...

You can only do so much to help others. As a supervisor who attended a mini retirement party recently, arriving late and waaaay behind everyone that had arrived 4 hours earlier. I had two beers and saw two people, one retired and one on the way up the ladder who both refused my offer of a ride, neither of which were anywhere near my home. Both, absolutely sure, and adamant that they could make it home. They went, one north and one south and I guess it turned out ok. But in this day and age...take the help!!! If I had forced the issue, I would be the jag. And I am tired of people second guessing. We are supose to help each other. Get a designated driver. Enlist your children and set an example. Call me for the ride, I will make sure you get there, ok and with a little ribbing later, but safe. Watch out for mine and I will do the same. Sgt. Kathleen O'Malley 773-470-7795...no crank calls or heavy breathing please. My heart cant take it! Any time any place, just call.

1/19/2008 11:52:00 PM  
Anonymous You know who said...

To Annonymous,
Your an idiot. Basically your telling these people that the people that they have worked along side of cant be trusted. That is nonsense...no...every boss is not someone you want when your in a tight spot, but before you decided to mess up, I am sure the officer has made one or two observations of bosses that are at least willing to point them in the right direction. I am not going to jail for anyone, but I do have the experience, knowledge and contacts to direct an officer to his best defense. You cannot make a blanket statement like that. This is in regard to the following:remain silent and the supervisor is not your friend, the majority of all sergeants in good districts are all merit, and will walk all over a police officer. This is where your union is suppose to be helping you. By the way....we all started in that union and I am still a member. Call me Sgt. Kathleen O'Malley 470-7795 and of course no crank calls please, I am getting too old for them. :)

1/20/2008 12:09:00 AM  
Blogger It's Not All Real said...

1/19/2008 06:21:00 PM

1. I said "if" he drove drunk.....didn't say he did. So a big fuck you to you!

2. Rule #15 states "intoxication" on or off duty, nothing about consumption.....so you can go fuck yourself on that.

3. Catching someone driving with one or two more drinks than they should have when there is no accident, cannot be compared to when there is an accident. So one more reason for you to go fuck yourself.

By the grace of God too many people, police and non-police, continue to drive when they shouldn't. More often than not they make it home, but if you crash, then all bets are off.

Again, don't drive if you've been drinking. It's just too damn dangerous, not only for you, but for the poor guy/gal who you crash into.

1/20/2008 01:12:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

on topic:
to all non-police posting or reading this site, get a clue. you are clueless and ignorant in your liberal, safe world that we and the military provide. just keeping allowing and approving ordinances such as smoking bans, guns, and traffic light cameras in the city and state. slowly and one by one they - the government- are taking are constitutional rights away because of worthless, i cant do a man's job pimps like you. free society this is not anymore. wake up. your kids will be proud of the world they have to grow up in. just make sure you live in a nice, secure neighborhood and say to yourself when robbed or raped - how could this of happened to me, what a shock? morons

1/20/2008 06:45:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fact is... admin rights were given to the P.O. AFTER he invoked his MIRANDA. Seems to me that once you are given your criminal rights, it's over. I don't think they can order you to talk after MIRANDA. If that's the case then anything after MIRANDA, including BAC is "fruits of poisonous tree". For this and other reasons,charges will be dropped. I predict that this kid will be back on the job eventually.



It is amazing to me how many stupid people there are on this job. Criminal and Administrative are to totally seperate things. Miranda has nothing to do with it. You can't invoke your Miranda right in the Administrative portion.

1/20/2008 08:31:00 AM  
Anonymous Put the Pit Bull to work said...

"SCC, it is time for you to endorse a candidate for states attorney.

Alvarez and Milan are NO votes people.

1/18/2008 09:55:00 PM"

This is as close to a given as it gets.

Peraica hates the Crook County Democratic machine.

Need I say more?

1/20/2008 08:49:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

everyone that had arrived 4 hours earlier. I had two beers and saw two people, one retired and one on the way up the ladder who both refused my offer of a ride, neither of which were anywhere near my home. Both, absolutely sure, and adamant that they could make it home.
1/19/2008 11:52:00 PM

I appreciate your sincere efforts. ODPO feel invincible when drinking and insist on driving despite efforts from others. A sign of high BAC. We need to make a more serious effort to help other ODPO when socializing. If they had too much, hide the keys, call a cab ask others to help stop the driver. We need to come together and realize DUI is not tolerated and lost of employment and criminal charges are not worth it. Not hard to determine who is impaired.

1/20/2008 10:15:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From the FOP website; current updates link:


Friday, January 18, 2008

Prosecutors Attempt To use administrative breathalyzer results at DUI trials 01/18/08

The Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office has made it clear that it will seek to introduce the administrative breathalyzer test results against any Chicago Police Officer who is charged with a DUI. The State has already done this on a previous case and at a bond hearing on January 17, 2008, the State propounded its intent on using an administrative result in an upcoming case. Several months ago, the State attempted to use these results in a case against a CPD officer. The Lodge immediately intervened and filed a motion to bar the administrative result. The Lodge outlined its argument in great detail and on November 15th, 2007, the Judge ruled in our favor when he determined that the State could not use the results of the breath test. The State announced that it will appeal the decision and the Lodge will again take the arguments to the Appellate Court. Until there is a ruling from the Appellate Court, the State will continue in its efforts to use these results. The Lodge will fight them in each and every case. However, officers must realize the State’s Attorney will attempt to use these results if an officer is arrested for a DUI. Although the Lodge, and at the very least the Judge who ruled in our favor this past November, believe that results from an administrative breath test must be barred at a criminal proceeding similar to administrative statements, there is a recent Illinois Appellate Court decision that ruled that administrative test results should not be afforded the same protections as do administrative statements. The Lodge believes it is a difference without distinction. The State views it differently. The Appellate Court will ultimately decide.

In the interim, officers must be cognizant of the fact that even though the State will seek to introduce the breath test results, officers should comply with the administrative breath test after being given a direct order to do so. The Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office believes that Chicago Police Officers should be treated as a sub-class of citizens who are not entitled to the same rights as others, such as those afforded to state’s attorneys. The Lodge is confident the Appellate Court will disagree with the opinion of our state’s attorneys. Until the decision, we will continue to fight the State on a case-by-case basis.

1/20/2008 10:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

on topic:
to all non-police posting or reading this site, get a clue. you are clueless and ignorant in your liberal, safe world that we and the military provide. just keeping allowing and approving ordinances such as smoking bans, guns, and traffic light cameras in the city and state. slowly and one by one they - the government- are taking are constitutional rights away because of worthless, i cant do a man's job pimps like you. free society this is not anymore. wake up. your kids will be proud of the world they have to grow up in. just make sure you live in a nice, secure neighborhood and say to yourself when robbed or raped - how could this of happened to me, what a shock? morons

1/20/2008 06:45:00 AM

The police and the military provide our safe world here in the U.S.? Really? Did you know the U.S. has never been invaded? I suppose that if all the police/soldiers got the flu tonight and were unable to work tomorrow, there would be hundreds of thousands of murders in Chicago alone. Meanwhile Mexico would invade from the South and Canada from the North. Your opinion of human nature is pretty fucked up. I don't think that angry egomaniac dudes like you should be the police. Get real. Now go in the basement and play with your gun collection. The "troubles" are right around the corner. Psycho.

1/20/2008 11:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fact is... admin rights were given to the P.O. AFTER he invoked his MIRANDA. Seems to me that once you are given your criminal rights, it's over. I don't think they can order you to talk after MIRANDA. If that's the case then anything after MIRANDA, including BAC is "fruits of poisonous tree". For this and other reasons,charges will be dropped. I predict that this kid will be back on the job eventually.

1/19/2008 04:36:00 PM

You're dumb. MIRANDA has absolutely nothing to do with a breathalyzer test. Who the fuck is teaching the law over there at the Academy? Morons.

1/20/2008 11:05:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, it's not a LAW. And no, the orders don't say you can't drink, it says you cannot be inebriated. Huge difference.

1/19/2008 11:02:00 PM

Read your G.O's again moron!

1/20/2008 12:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's Not All Real said...
1/19/2008 06:21:00 PM

1. I said "if" he drove drunk.....didn't say he did. So a big fuck you to you!

2. Rule #15 states "intoxication" on or off duty, nothing about consumption.....so you can go fuck yourself on that.

3. Catching someone driving with one or two more drinks than they should have when there is no accident, cannot be compared to when there is an accident. So one more reason for you to go fuck yourself.

By the grace of God too many people, police and non-police, continue to drive when they shouldn't. More often than not they make it home, but if you crash, then all bets are off.

Again, don't drive if you've been drinking. It's just too damn dangerous, not only for you, but for the poor guy/gal who you crash into.

1/20/2008 01:12:00 AM

You can come off the montain moses........we already have our commandments! Make sure when you step down from your highorse you trip on your dick and fall flat on your face.

1/20/2008 12:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're dumb. MIRANDA has absolutely nothing to do with a breathalyzer test. Who the fuck is teaching the law over there at the Academy? Morons.

1/20/2008 11:05:00 AM

Blame the academy for everything. Manpower, contracts, no cars, blame the academy. Economy is bad, blame the academy. Cannot control officers after graduation. Somehow they have to remember something, besides hair gel.

1/20/2008 08:22:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can come off the montain moses........we already have our commandments! Make sure when you step down from your highorse you trip on your dick and fall flat on your face.

1/20/2008 12:18:00 PM

At least I CAN trip on my cord. You can't even see your little guy cuz your belly's in the way.

1/20/2008 08:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To:
1/19/2008 05:40:00 PM

Uh.... ascruse me there slick sleeve.........While you were in pre-school we didn't have felony review. When the arrestee was charged by the W/C he went to court on the felony charge. WE ARE THE ONLY JURISDICTION WHO UES THE FELONY REVIEW PROCESS. It is entirely self-imposed. Now go get that shine-box

1/19/2008 05:40:00 PM

And you asshats sent so much shit to court approved some drunk Irish W/C that the SAO instituted felony review, not the police dept. Not self-imposed. And that was in the 1970s you ignorant bastard so you are retired or an old senile relic. Is that you Cronin? Go get your fucking shinebox.

1/20/2008 10:03:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, it's not a LAW. And no, the orders don't say you can't drink, it says you cannot be inebriated. Huge difference.

1/19/2008 11:02:00 PM

Read your G.O's again moron!

1/20/2008 12:15:00 PM

_________________

Actually, it's in the Rules and Regulations. Rule 15-
Intoxication on or off duty.

Nowhere does it say you cannot have a glass of wine at a wedding.

Now who's the moron???

1/21/2008 12:27:00 AM  
Blogger It's Not All Real said...

1/20/2008 11:01:00 AM

Technically, the U.S. has been invaded before.

During the War of 1812, English troops invaded the capital and set fire to the White House.

Prior to World War I, Pancho Villa in command of troops during the Mexican revolution, invaded New Mexico and executed 16 American employees removed from a train. Later his forces invaded Columbus, New Mexico and killed 14 American troops and 10 civilians. They stripped the town of anything valuable and burnt it to the ground. These actions resulted in an invasion by U.S. Forces into Mexico to find Villa. It failed in locating him.

During World War II, small parts of the Aleutian islands were occupied by Japanese forces.

Other than that, you're pretty much on the money.

1/21/2008 12:48:00 AM  
Blogger It's Not All Real said...

1/20/2008 12:18:00 PM

A simple "go fuck yourself" seems appropriate. Moses I am not, nor have I ever professed to be.

1/21/2008 12:49:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...
Uh.... ascruse me there slick sleeve.........While you were in pre-school we didn't have felony review. When the arrestee was charged by the W/C he went to court on the felony charge. WE ARE THE ONLY JURISDICTION WHO UES THE FELONY REVIEW PROCESS. It is entirely self-imposed. Now go get that shine-box

1/19/2008 05:40:00 PM


___________________________________

In order to prove one wrong when someone says that we are the only ones who use the "Felony Review" process, all one has to do is show at least one other county that uses it.

I think this fits the bill. There are others, I only wanted to prove at least one other. You don't really know what you are talking about!



Lake County uses Felony Review!

1/21/2008 11:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TO:

"Anonymous said...
Uh.... ascruse me there slick sleeve.........While you were in pre-school we didn't have felony review. When the arrestee was charged by the W/C he went to court on the felony charge. WE ARE THE ONLY JURISDICTION WHO UES THE FELONY REVIEW PROCESS. It is entirely self-imposed. Now go get that shine-box

NOW GO GET YOUR FUCKING SHINEBOX!

1/21/2008 07:26:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, it's in the Rules and Regulations. Rule 15-
Intoxication on or off duty.

Nowhere does it say you cannot have a glass of wine at a wedding.

Now who's the moron???

1/21/2008 12:27:00 AM

You are the moron. You're probaly one of the guys who still thinks its cool to carry a snub off-dty without qualifying with it thinking you'll only get 3 days. Moron!

1/22/2008 02:27:00 AM  
Blogger It's Not All Real said...

1/22/2008 02:27:00 AM

You sound like a 2nd grader saying "double back on you" or other shit like that. Why don't you say something like: oops, I was wrong, thank you for the correction, or better yet, say nothing at all?

1/22/2008 11:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's Not All Real said...
1/22/2008 02:27:00 AM

You sound like a 2nd grader saying "double back on you" or other shit like that. Why don't you say something like: oops, I was wrong, thank you for the correction, or better yet, say nothing at all?

1/22/2008 11:31:00 PM

How about.....GFY? Does that suffice for an answer? You moron.

1/23/2008 01:25:00 AM  
Blogger It's Not All Real said...

1/23/2008 01:25:00 AM

You're obviously a neanderthal, troll, or crybaby asshat. You cannot offer rebuttal, only shit. I'll not bother wasting anyone's time anymore on your nonsense.

1/23/2008 11:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's Not All Real said...
1/23/2008 01:25:00 AM

You're obviously a neanderthal, troll, or crybaby asshat. You cannot offer rebuttal, only shit. I'll not bother wasting anyone's time anymore on your nonsense.

1/23/2008 11:14:00 AM

No, no and certainly no. None of the above moron. Good, goodbye and see ya! In case you have'nt figured it out......................you are the nonsense, moron

1/24/2008 01:19:00 AM  

<< Home

Newer Posts.......................... ..........................Older Posts