Search found 2 matches

by Chris
Sat May 06, 2006 2:21 pm
Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
Topic: LEO Contact (or lack of)
Replies: 13
Views: 3960

flintknapper wrote:
Chris wrote:, i honestly don't break my neck trying to find a phone in drunk anymore.

you abuse the dog long enough, he'll eventually bite back
. that scenario happens all too often. if you aren't willing to follow through with your report, then you shouldn't be reporting it. leave it for someone else. i don't want this to be taken as cynical on the part of the police, just an attempt to educate those in the committment required when reporting a crime.

I understand it perfectly. It is also the reason DPS don't fight each other to get to any "serious" automobile accidents. Too many times they arrive ahead of the ambulance only to have bystanders yell at them "to do something". Aside from securing the scene and rendering basic first aid, there is really little else they can do. These are just the harsh realities of these litigious times.
I do not view your post as cynical at all.
as far as serious accidents, yes, we all try to get there quickly. there could be an instance of someone trapped in a burning vehicle. otherwise, you don't want to move people in accidents without the collars, back boards, and assistance.

this has happened to me a couple of times...i'm on a serious accident scene and the only one there. the rubberneckers rear end each other. they stop in the middle of the road, get out, and request that i immediately handle their accident because they have to get to work or where ever it is they're going.

i had the highway shut down once due to a very serious accident. a lady called 911 and requested a police officer escort her through the traffic jam because she had to pick up her mother at the airport.

some people are just plain stupid and there's no excuse for it. i've had the roads shut down for accidents and people will drive by and honk, cuss, and flip me the bird.
GrannyGlock wrote:Very interesting. Never having been in law enforcement, I had no idea of the problems you would go through to establish PC. If a concerned citizen did stay connected and close enough to observe (speeding not an option, I drive like a Granny, too) would it be helpful? Should we tell the 911 or other source we will be staying close?
it would be beneficial to know that the person is willing to file a sworn complaint. i personally would put forth a little bit more effort in helping them.

herein lies another problem, people don't know how to tell a police dispatcher where they're at, or where they're going. caller says, "we're at mile marker 1." the dispatcher goes to the radio and says, "they're passing mile marker 1." what that person meant is 'we just passed mile marker 1 and are taking the next exit.' i can't tell you the number of times someone says they're going east and they're actually going west. when you ask someone where they're at, they'll tell you, "i'm near the big billboard." that does nothing for me. but since the traffic violation must be observed by me in my jurisdiction, then i have to get there with enough time to follow. we had a guy and his wife call and complain over a drunk they called in. here's how it went down.

he called initially in city #1 that he was following a drunk. already heading to city #2, he was transferred. no one in city #2 was close, so they transferred to city #3, as they were heading to and were almost in city #3. city #3 doesn't have a huge stretch of road, and with no one close, it was transferred to city #4. city #4, also not having a huge portion of the road gave it to city #5. city #5 only has about 3 miles. no one could catch up to them so they entered back into city #2. city #2 has a small portion of this highway so they transferred it back to city #1.

this sounds like a joke, but it actually happened. the same thing has happened to me in pursuits. i'm going through the metroplex and as soon as the dispatcher contacts one city to ask them for assistance, we're almost out of that city and into the next. i had to educate a dispatcher once on calling two cities ahead when i'm in a pursuit.

what you have to remember is that DWI is an offense against the public, not you personally. i like it when citizens call in things because i cannot be every where. what i don't like is when a burglar backs a moving truck up to the front door and literally moves someone out of their own house, and we get not one single call. yet when a police car shows up to take the report, every single person in the neighborhood is outside trying to see what's going on. if you do happen to see this moving truck, it's also preferred that you call when it's there, not an hour later, or you notify a police officer who happens to be driving by you and it is now convenient to notify them.

the police and the people have to work together. most of the time they're not always on the same page though. you have to look out for each other. i see people get offended when the clerk at the store asks for ID when using a credit card. me, i appreciate that and get upset when they don't.
by Chris
Sat May 06, 2006 2:04 am
Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
Topic: LEO Contact (or lack of)
Replies: 13
Views: 3960

under the significant probability of taking flak for this, i'm going to be very honest here. it is typical for police to go in the opposite direction when the call for a 'phone in drunk' comes in. these calls are generally not targeted to a specific officer, just to everyone in hopes that the closest one will take it. since no one specifically is called, there isn't any one to hold accountable for not responding.

before the rants come in, let me explain where that mentality comes from. i've stopped several vehicles that were called in being allegedly intoxicated. only a handful of times was the person actually intoxicated. in the few instances where they were, i ended up spending the next hour or two trying to find the person a ride for lack of a good case. the problem? to get a conviction on a DWI offense, i must have probable cause to even make the stop. DWI is not something you can stop for, it is an "after the fact" finding. in other words, you do not stop for the DWI itself, but traffic violations that you can attribute as being indicative of someone driving under the influence. a credible witness, as a private citizen would be considered, is reason enough for me to stop, BUT the only problem is that the credible witness usually refuses to stop and be the witness. even after the 'witness' follows, i still have to develop my own PC because 99% of the callers will not stick around to complete any statements, since they don't want their name on a report against this person. this does little to assist me in getting a conviction and essentially wastes my time and the taxpayers time. i had one that was called in and i found. i followed to the edge of my city limits and developed no PC. the guy called and complained on me. i really appreciate it when you complain on me for trying to work with you. (the courts have ruled that an officer can no longer stop a DWI, where the stop must be from some traffic infraction, outside of his or her jurisdiction. you can thank an arlington suburb for that.)

for an officer, the average DWI takes 3-4 hours from start to finish. when you call in a drunk, don't plan on sticking around to be the witness, and i make the arrest, i get to spend 3-4 hours trying my best to make a weak charge stick. not something i'm fond of.

everyone wants to be the good citizen and make that quick and easy call, but should it require any further investment, they're done. after that handful early in my career, i honestly don't break my neck trying to find a phone in drunk anymore.

you abuse the dog long enough, he'll eventually bite back. that scenario happens all too often. if you aren't willing to follow through with your report, then you shouldn't be reporting it. leave it for someone else. i don't want this to be taken as cynical on the part of the police, just an attempt to educate those in the committment required when reporting a crime.

Return to “LEO Contact (or lack of)”