Loading ...Fixing Frank’s Follies
Marion County Public Safety Director Scott Newman has unveiled a plan to clean up IMPD. Those measures include…
- More intensive supervision of officers in the field
- Tighter accounting and inventory controls of search warrants and seizures of drugs and money
- Bringing back the previous practice of polygraph tests for officers assigned to narcotics enforcement, vice, intelligence and property room
- Creating the position of recruiter in order to ensure the department attracts the best, high quality candidates, including establishing a presence on college campuses
- Establishing a staffed Office of Career Development with the task of guiding officers toward more directed career goals, cultivating management and leadership skills, and providing more consistent evaluations and training
- Requiring performance evaluations on a regular basis
Of course had the people who had been running IMPD before Greg Ballard took over had done some of this, maybe these steps would not have been necessary.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:28 am
First let me say these are all good ideas and should have been in place before…however, like most government leaders’ proposals– there is a cost, and an important array of questions arise: What IS the cost (they don’t say), are they willing to honestly advocate for the funds from us, the taxpayers? And ARE we willing to pay?
Point by point:
1. More intensive supervision is CRITICAL. But also counter to notions advocated in the past to “get officers out from behind a desk and on the street” Clearly we need as many on the street as possible, espcially in these violent days, BUT more officers on the street AND more supervision = more officers, including more at higher rank = more costs for salaries,benefits,equipment,overhead. How much?
2. More accounting and controls = more “middle management” or bureaucracy = more officers and/or civilian staff = more costs for salaries, benefits, equipment, overhead. How much?
3. Polygraphs = modest additional staffing/contrator costs, probably monitored and managed by the additional officers staff under #1 & 2. Probably not a major cost if 1 & 2 are done…. but why was this eliminated before? I’m guessing even if there were some devious bad apples who proposed eliminating polygraphs so corruption could take root…the elimination would have officially been based upon cost savings (ie. eliminate bureaucracy for more officers on street argument). So at least some cost involved.
4. Position of recruiter and travel expenses to college etc. = at least 1-2 salaries/benefits/equipment/overhead/MILEAGE = costs. How much?
5. Staffed Office of Career Development = same.
6. Performance evaluations? Someone’s gotta do ‘em, compile ‘em and do something with them. Costs here may be folded into item #1…bigger problem may be with FOP.
OK. So, to summarize. We will either incur substantial costs for new hires at a pay rate adequate to have competent people to manage and supervise a large police department OR we will pull a number of officers off the streets to desk duty.
More government ain’t free. Give us the fiscal/practical impact, that’s all I ask.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:19 am
more supervision? one of the biggest problems for this police department has always been lack of supervision. the reasons are many, but the most glaring is that all supervisors come up from the ranks. it is extremely hard to take action against one of your friends who you may have come through the academy with you, or worked side by side with you on the street fighting crime. also, police look at themselves as a large family. it is always difficult for police officers to accept supervision because of several reasons, such as most officers are very educated and feel equal to thier supervisors. and officers believe that at anytime they may have to take a life and if they are able to do this than surely they don’t need someone looking over thier shoulders. unlike most jobs where your boss is in the same building , or in many cases same room, the police are spread over a 20 mile by 20 mile county. it is not uncommon that once roll call (punching your time card) is over that an officer will not see a supervisor until the next day. hardly will an officer hit for a supervisor during the shift, an officer is expected to be able to handle the job.
July 18th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Cabrini-Greens. Google it if you don’t already know about it.
July 18th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I guess I missed the whole part about the lab Newman co-owns getting all the city’s forensic business.
July 18th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Hey think again so he co-owns a lab. So what does the lab do good work? When Peterson was in charge there was all sort of bad work being done in forensics and the coroner’s office. I will take a lab that does good work and I don’t give a freaking fart who gets the money. Just put the criminals behind bars and I’ll be happy!
July 19th, 2008 at 1:59 am
A) Micromanagement kills morale. The reason most patrolmen don’t like being supervised is because many of the sergeants were horrible patrolmen. Many of the lieutenants were horrible sergeants, and so on. There are good sergeants and lieutenants, but they don’t have to micromanage because their people respect them enough in the first place that they try to work hard for them. If you want to fix the supervision problem promote on merit, not by generating a list and then promoting based on quotas off of said list.
B) WOS is that one of the officers who had been indicted passed 6 (six) polygraphs while under investigation by the feds, doing all the things for which he ended up getting indicted. Polygraphs are good for gaining the public’s confidence, but that’s about it. Unless the powers that be plan on improving the quality and vetting the people administering them…
July 19th, 2008 at 8:36 am
guy77: The lab in question has so-so results and they’re slower than molases in January. Ask around.
The choice of Scott Newman for director of public safety ws a bad one. Frankly, the job is duplicitous and needs to be eliminated.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Need to start by cleaning house at the very top. Spears needs to go along with his hand picked cronies.
Reorganize back to the IPD standards, promote qualified supervisors not warm bodies to meet quotas.
Reestablish morale among the troops, with new leaders who are there to fight the crime and corruption. Weed out the officers who bought their way or rank onto IPD and the MCSD under Anderson.
Supervisors are needed to back the officers and allow them to do their job; the job that they are trained and paid to do. Then and only then will the murder rate subside.
Send the convicted to prison, jail the repeat offenders instead of releasing them on the street to further victimize the public. Continued warrant sweeps, hold probation violators instead of allowing them to be released from their probation unsuccessfully.
The Marion County Judges are NOT doing their part to make Indianapolis a safe city.
It can and must be done to once again make Indianapolis a safe city.
and Hank “that dog will hunt”
July 19th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Hey what happened to Wilson did he fall in love! :)
July 19th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Doesn’t IPD has their own forensic business?
July 19th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Ask spears why these guys passed several polygraphs in the past? why the department under spears’ control used the polygraph (ran by their own officer) to move detectives by “failing” them. now that those officers were cleared by real investigative tools they have a huge settlement that’s gonna cost the city (taxpayers), hundreds of thousands of dollars. polygraphs are proven ineffective. they work as a scare tactic that helps elicit a confession. they can also help prove statements or evidence. they should never be used solely to judge any one. up to 20% of the population are untestable anyway. because they are too nervous or pathological liars.
Two former detectives have a mediation with the city coming up with the trial scheduled in august in federal court. Spears, Foley, and Swarm should have to foot the bill.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
I may be wrong-but I believe Newman disinvested himself from his lab when he accepted his new position with the city.
All DNA labs are experiencing tremendous backlogs. This stems from not being able to recruit enough DNA trained, certified lab technicians. There is a constant struggle to recruit technicallly certified individuals. They are scarce and come with high salary price tags.
Some of the backlogs are incurred because of the nature of DNA testing itself. The processing and producing of accurate results is not something that can be accomplished in a short time period.
July 19th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Thanks Veritas I suspected there was a back log. There is a ex judge from Franklin Twsp that is also a partner in the company. I have a friend whose daughter was working for IPD. I got the impression that IPD had their own forensic labatory. Does IUPUI get involved? Just trolling.
When I was 18 my father knew nothing, when I turned 21 I was amazed what he had learned in 3 years! - Mark Twain
July 19th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Isn’t cool when you know your in a room with some very intelligent people. - moneyguy 2008
July 20th, 2008 at 12:06 am
guy77money - please don’t include a fake website address with your comments. Thanks!
July 20th, 2008 at 6:19 am
Ok sorry I don’t have a website so I will stop doing it.
July 20th, 2008 at 6:48 am
Opps it gets left in there automatically. Just deleted it. Hmm got to get me a blog so I can add a website. May come to the web conference if I can pencil in the time.
July 20th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Unfortunately, corrupt police departments use polygraphs to get rid of or discredit those who are honest and keep those who are liars.
A lot of clean-up is needed and I pity those who were fired for failing a polygraph who were really telling the truth.
I never recommend a civilian take a polygraph with the police department, the results will be what the department wants it to be. I was a victim of a law enforcement agency years ago. An officer was visiting my home and stole $1300 in cash I’d just received from income taxes. I filed a complaint and took a polygraph as to the truth that I had the money. The results were that I was lying. There was no MO for me to make such an allegation other than the fact that I DID have the money and it was missing after the officer left.
I do believe polygraphs should be given to employees. I think the integrity of the tests is in question and I think individuals should have the right to an independent examination by a polygrapher or to have their own polygrapher present during the examination to make their own independant analysis and that results should be submitted to an independent committee if they are inconsistent.
July 20th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
the mayor’s office has explained to me that Director Newman divested himself of his DNA Testing business upon taking his current position.
July 21st, 2008 at 7:13 am
“Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our STANDING ARMY is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide PERSONAL SECURITY, and where gun violence is a serious problem.” Justice Antonin Scalia, Heller v DC
-
Apparently, Justice Scalia has forgotten that police (and government) have NO DUTY TO PROTECT YOU. As evidence, I offer the following article from the New York Times, 28 June 2005:
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
-
WASHINGTON, June 27 - The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.
-
The decision, with an OPINION BY JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA and dissents from Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, overturned a ruling by a federal appeals court in Colorado. The appeals court had permitted a lawsuit to proceed against a Colorado town, Castle Rock, for the failure of the police to respond to a woman’s pleas for help after her estranged husband violated a protective order by kidnapping their three young daughters, whom he eventually killed.
-
One could wish for some consistency and clarity from SCOTUS.
-
YOU are responsible for your own safety — not Government. The tools to protect yourself, your family and property are available to you.
-
See U.S. Constitution, Second Amendment and Indiana Constitution, Article 1 Section 32.