bridgett s
New member
I have a question for all the LEO's out there:
If you were on the scene of an accident like this (but NOT involving a Police officer), and it was deemed necessary to have a blood alcohol test taken. Isn't there a list of approved locations to have this test taken at? Seems to me that if a civilian were to be in this same situation, that this test (the same one given to officer Basard) would hold up in court, as the officers on sight evidently "should" know proper procedure. Why else would an officer, thought to have killed an innocent civilian, be taken to an "unapproved" facility for testing? Having said that, I think I read somewhere that it was the person administering the test that was in question, but again, if a civilian went through the same exact series of events, I would bet hard earned cash that the results would differ, and the test would stand up as admissable in court. Am I wrong on this?
I have known too many officers in my life to fall to the easy way of condemning all LEO's as a**holes, and crooks. I have known some good ones, and a few bad ones. It happens. But when a bad one comes along and get's caught breaking the law, I think a public flaying is in order. It's that "higher standard" thing.
Police officers have a thankless job, and I for one appreciate what they (the good ones) do.
I live in the Indianapolis area, and I hope they loose the key when they send officer Bastard away.
Unfortunately, too many people are paying the price for his mistake. Not just the families of those involved, but also the local community at large. It will take a long time before trust can be restored in our local police force and governing agency, if at all.
IMO
If you were on the scene of an accident like this (but NOT involving a Police officer), and it was deemed necessary to have a blood alcohol test taken. Isn't there a list of approved locations to have this test taken at? Seems to me that if a civilian were to be in this same situation, that this test (the same one given to officer Basard) would hold up in court, as the officers on sight evidently "should" know proper procedure. Why else would an officer, thought to have killed an innocent civilian, be taken to an "unapproved" facility for testing? Having said that, I think I read somewhere that it was the person administering the test that was in question, but again, if a civilian went through the same exact series of events, I would bet hard earned cash that the results would differ, and the test would stand up as admissable in court. Am I wrong on this?
I have known too many officers in my life to fall to the easy way of condemning all LEO's as a**holes, and crooks. I have known some good ones, and a few bad ones. It happens. But when a bad one comes along and get's caught breaking the law, I think a public flaying is in order. It's that "higher standard" thing.
Police officers have a thankless job, and I for one appreciate what they (the good ones) do.
I live in the Indianapolis area, and I hope they loose the key when they send officer Bastard away.
Unfortunately, too many people are paying the price for his mistake. Not just the families of those involved, but also the local community at large. It will take a long time before trust can be restored in our local police force and governing agency, if at all.
IMO