Trooper FIRED for NOT writing Speeding Ticket

[Mani]

This is $#@!ed up on several levels...


http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoram...182456916.html

In a rarity among modern American jurisprudence, a state highway trooper has lost his job over a traffic ticket he didn't write — and now his fight has sparked a wider dispute over who gets preferential treatment for enforcing the law on the road. Does anyone need to guess that this happened in Florida?

The tale starts last November, when Florida Highway Patrol trooper Charles Swindle stopped state Rep. Charles McBurney, R-Jacksonville, for doing 87 mph in a 70 mph zone. McBurney was driving a Toyota with a license plate identifying him as a state lawmaker; after checking with his sergeant, Swindle told McBurney "I'm cutting you a break" and cited him only for lacking proof of insurance — a $10 ticket rather than a $280 one that McBurney could have faced.

According to Florida state investigators, Swindle did the same for another driver he pulled over at the same time, telling his dispatcher “I’m going to write (McBurney) a warning and be nice; I’m going to stroke him ’cause I didn’t see his insurance card."

But the episode bothered McBurney (who denied going 87 mph) so much that he wrote to Swindle's superiors on legislature letterhead, complaining that Swindle was favoring state officials. "If those who enforce our laws fail to meet the highest ethical standards, there is erosion of that confidence," McBurney wrote. "I am concerned that as Trooper Swindle acted in such fashion to me, that he would do so to any law-abiding citizen of our state."

That letter launched an internal investigation, and two weeks ago, Swindle was fired for "conduct unbecoming a public employee." And now Swindle and his attorney have appealed his dismissal, contending the Florida Highway Patrol has an unwritten policy of letting state lawmakers off easy at traffic stops to avoid trouble come budget-writing time. The FHP denies that's the case, and has speeding tickets written to several lawmakers over the past few years to show it.

All of this falls into that rubric so often heard in these situations of "just doing my job." Swindle clearly believed he was supposed to treat some drivers differently than others, a discretion granted most traffic enforcers who aren't robotic cameras. McBurney sees part of his job to fight the appearance of corruption, even if it leads to an officer's firing. And Florida officials think they have no choice but to deny the existence of a caste system on public roads that favor some drivers over others, despite providing license plates for lawmakers and others that double as donations to Police Activity League charities. To paraphrase Upton Sinclair, it's hard to get people to understand something when their salary depends on not understanding it.

[Slutter McGee]

What an ass. Who complains about getting let off from a speeding ticket. Must be rich.

Slutter McGee

[TheGrinch]

What an ass. Who complains about getting let off from a speeding ticket. Must be rich.

Slutter McGee

A politician who's being noble for once (or at least appears to be), and doesn't want to get preferential treatment that you or I wouldn't be afforded.

I'm not sure the guy should have lost his job for it, but nonetheless refreshing to see a politician stand up against getting preferential treatment from the "Just-us" system as some here like to call it.

[kcchiefs6465]

What an ass. Who complains about getting let off from a speeding ticket. Must be rich.

Slutter McGee

I'm glad he did. I respect the trooper who wrote himself a ticket as well, no matter how redundant that was. 87 in a 70 for me? A few MPHs might be added and I'd be spending a night in jail.

I don't usually laugh at someone losing their job but $#@! him. Maybe a few people might keep their [actual productive] jobs from his absence.

[kcchiefs6465]

Who am I kidding, a new levvy will add someone more [un-]'productive' than he.

[Occam's Banana]

A politician who's being noble for once (or at least appears to be), and doesn't want to get preferential treatment that you or I wouldn't be afforded.

I'm not sure the guy should have lost his job for it, but nonetheless refreshing to see a politician stand up against getting preferential treatment from the "Just-us" system as some here like to call it.

I'm not quite sure that that is what's going on here.

The bolded below suggests that McBurney wasn't bothered so much by the fact that he himself did not get a more expensive ticket as he was about other "law-abiding" citizens who might not get more expensive tickets.

He isn't saying "I didn't get a ticket that other people would have gotten, and that's not fair to other people."

He is saying, "I didn't get the more expensive ticket, so other people might not be getting more expensive tickets, either."

IOW: he seems to be bitching because Swindle isn't being a diligent revenue collector for the State.

Swindle [...] cited [McBurney] only for lacking proof of insurance — a $10 ticket rather than a $280 one that McBurney could have faced. [...]

But the episode bothered McBurney (who denied going 87 mph) so much that he wrote to Swindle's superiors on legislature letterhead, complaining that Swindle was favoring state officials. "If those who enforce our laws fail to meet the highest ethical standards, there is erosion of that confidence," McBurney wrote. "I am concerned that as Trooper Swindle acted in such fashion to me, that he would do so to any law-abiding citizen of our state."

[TheGrinch]

I'm not quite sure that that is what's going on here.

The bolded below suggests that McBurney wasn't bothered so much by the fact that he himself did not get a more expensive ticket as he was about other "law-abiding" citizens who might not get more expensive tickets.

He isn't saying "I didn't get a ticket that other people would have gotten, and that's not fair to other people."

He is saying, "I didn't get the more expensive ticket, so other people might not be getting more expensive tickets, either."

IOW: he seems to be bitching because Swindle isn't being a diligent revenue collector for the State.

Wow, you're right, I misread the statement with the word "not" in it, as in "I am concerned that as Trooper Swindle acted in such fashion to me, that he would not do so to any law-abiding citizen of our state."

In other words, it sounded as if he said that his concern was that he would not do the same for other citizens, whereas his concern seems to be that he would do the same in letting off other law-abiding citizens. That is messed up.

Seems the bad cops have discretion for what they do, whereas the good ones increasingly don't to even let you off with a warning.

[Mani]

Ya, that's why I said this is $#@!ed up on several levels.


The politician initially seemed pissed because he was actually pulled over. He DENIES going 87, and decided he was going to $#@! the police for trying to pull him over and saying, "I'm gonna be nice to you and not give you a ticket."


And using his authority to tell the cop, "$#@! YOU, for pulling me over, now I'm gonna complain on your ass for not doing your job."

And then he's either complaining about "preferential treatment" or complaining that He's not writing enough tickets. It seems maybe his motivation is to $#@! over the cop for pulling him over in the first place..

The whole thing is a cluster $#@!.

Cop getting busted for preferential treatment.
Cop complaining that he was following unwritten rules.
So now are cops going to be even more strict and not give warnings, even to citizens, when citizens occasionally do get off with warnings?

I don't see any damn good coming out of this for the law abiding citizen.

[phill4paul]

I wonder if the P.B.A. will be pulling the guns for reinstatement of the troopers. NOT give someone a ticket and get fired. Shoot an unarmed civilian in the back and get reinstated with back pay. Seems legit in new AmeriKa.

[fisharmor]

So now are cops going to be even more strict and not give warnings, even to citizens, when citizens occasionally do get off with warnings?

I don't see any damn good coming out of this for the law abiding citizen.

The fact that cops give warnings at all is destructive to the rule of law.
As long as they make determinations on the ground as to who is and isn't punished, there is a disincentive to actually changing the law.
If everyone got tickets for every single traffic violation, within six weeks nobody in the US would have a license anymore. And we'd have a pretty big incentive to reexamine the laws.

Also, there's a direct link between cops giving people a pass and cops deciding to beat the white meat out of people's heads and getting away with it.
We've created a caste of enforcers with broad discretion in what to enforce and what not to enforce.
It should surprise nobody that some of them like to enforce a lot harder than others... and it should surprise nobody that when they do, they're given the same latitude that the ones who ignore traffic violations are given, only in the opposite direction.

[PaulConventionWV]

A politician who's being noble for once (or at least appears to be), and doesn't want to get preferential treatment that you or I wouldn't be afforded.

I'm not sure the guy should have lost his job for it, but nonetheless refreshing to see a politician stand up against getting preferential treatment from the "Just-us" system as some here like to call it.

It goes both ways. In one sense, you're right. In another sense, he's reinforcing the idea that speeding tickets can and should be issued at every opportunity. This leads to stricter enforcement, meaner officers, and perhaps even a lower threshold for desperate people to consider running from the police when they see the blue lights flashing behind them. I agree with you on your point, but I don't think it offers us any hope in terms of getting rid of these awful laws. I'm not one of those lefties who think the ultimate goal is for everyone to suffer equally.

[enjerth]

I don't see any damn good coming out of this for the law abiding citizen.

Didn't you read the story? Isn't it a wonderful story to tell?

Even if he was just being a jerk, thanks to McBurney for bringing it up! Now it's a juicy story. Just emphasize the part about the corruption, not the clowns.

[TheGrinch]

It goes both ways. In one sense, you're right. In another sense, he's reinforcing the idea that speeding tickets can and should be issued at every opportunity. This leads to stricter enforcement, meaner officers, and perhaps even a lower threshold for desperate people to consider running from the police when they see the blue lights flashing behind them. I agree with you on your point, but I don't think it offers us any hope in terms of getting rid of these awful laws. I'm not one of those lefties who think the ultimate goal is for everyone to suffer equally.

Read down in the thread, I misread and realize that now.