Comments on: I(MPD) SWEAR

By: Think Again

Think Again — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:40:09 +0000

Uh, Abdul…I heard you ridicule the lack of swearing-in of officers multiple times on your radio show.

If that disdain did not transfer to outright belief the Supremes would agree with you, well, pardon us for the leap of faith. It was certainly implied.

Having said that, I still don’t know why the powers that be don’t re-swear all officers annually, just like when they graduate academy. It’d be impressive. Invite in the citizens…make all cops re-affirm their vows, so to speak.

Gives me goose pimples just thinking about it.

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:03:20 +0000

If I remember correctly it was never an issue of state law but that IMPD’s own general orders that stated “all members will be sworn into the IMPD”.

By: Abdul-Hakim

Abdul-Hakim — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:36:00 +0000

Please point out where I said the court would uphold the trial court’s decision.

By: arnie

arnie — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 02:13:50 +0000

Dam another great big league prediction huh Abdul.

By: Fuzzy Curmudgeon

Fuzzy Curmudgeon — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:20:29 +0000

Now she should have to pay the costs for this whole fiasco.

Of course that won’t happen.

By: BR

BR — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:19:54 +0000

Not that we don’t love your blog here in BR, Abdul :-)

By: BR

BR — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:19:26 +0000

Well, come on…. What do 5 Indiana Supreme Court justices know about Indiana law compared to one Illinois Barrister?

By: Indy Bruiser

Indy Bruiser — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:41:55 +0000

Abdul, were you shocked at the 5-0 decision? I seem to remember you thought the law was clear about the requirement for officers to be sworn in to the new IMPD.