I just wonder if there is something else at fault when you get officers stressing enough to discharge their weapons (off duty) or drinking and driving?

Might be totally unrelated incidents, but sometimes where there is smoke there is fire.

Watch the rank & file in the upcoming weeks. If more incidents occur, then there is a problem with the department that like as not, will lead right back to the top tiers of management.

To echo what has already been commented on and offer some fresh perspective, let me say the following. A police Officer's job is inherently stresssful. When you tack on the daily drama of personal relationships and demands put on their personal lives, then yes, some are going to stray down less than desireable paths. There should and must be accountability from within. If this means an employees assistance program with consolers and treatment options then that is something the officers and the union need to start demanding.
Moving on to the Officer Bisard incident. this officer appeared to be a normally functioning, obviously distraut, officer at the crash scene. That said, to blow a .19 BAC suggests a chronic alcohol problem. Chronic alcoholics can go several days without drinking and still have a BAC >.10. Like any other drug the body consumes in enough quantity, you build a tolerance to it and its effects and therefore need more and more to achive the same “high” or “buzz.” This officer is no different. the question is why didn't someone notice his drinking habits and get him help before this tragedy?

The FOP stands behind it's officers because that is it's job. There are officers that are wrongly accused of things each day. (not everything is newworthy) and the FOP's job is to stand behind the officer and make sure he is fairly repesented (we all know the media and general public will crucify any officer accused of anything) when the facts and evidence are all on the table, the FOP will and does re-evaluate their position in each case.

In closing let me reiterate what TA said about the fact that there are many good officers out there and the public needs to realize that. Keep your heads up, and stand proud.

After I read the above two posts, I claled a nurse friend who regularly administers BATs in her role as a trauma center ER nurse.

I told her the alcohol swab story. She laughed so hard she probablyl blew coffee through her nose. She assured me the current testing methods are indeed accurate, IF, and only IF, the chain of custody regarding test results, is strong and uninterupted. Ditto with urine tests.

I wasn't aware that someone could blow a positive reading a day after being drunk, as Blue indicates. My nurse friend wasn't sure if that could happen or not…she only gives tests to persons she encounters, withotu asking how long sicne they've drank. She indicated she's been called as a chain-of-custody witness in numerous trials in four different central Indiana jurisdictions.

I'm not a scientist, so I cannot judge the veracity of these alcohol-test claims. But in truth, they sound more like urban myth than reality.

None of that changes the facts in this case. If the FOP offers minimal assistance to the officer, I suppose I can udnerstand that. Everyone's entitled to a competent defense.

However, my example of Peterson administration FOP actions, included full-throated, loud media defense of every officer charged or suspected of anything. So much so, that I suspect that administration grew weary of having to appear to be “against” the police, when ina ctuality, they may have been against bad LEOs only.

Again–it's just like teachers' unions defending all teachers, even the bad ones.

To TA: It is very possible to blow a value >.10 several days after drinking if the person is a chronic drinker. The chronic alcoholic today isn't the guy leaning up against a dumpster with a bottle in his hand. These folks drink in excess over time, and accumilate that high of a BAC over time, while appearing perfectly normal and able to perform all of the “stupid human tricks” that LE makes them go thru on a suspected DUI stop. These folks have a chronic problem and over time have learned how to hide it from most.

I will concur with Joe above that someone on the scene should have seen SOME signs, perhaps not of impairment but the glassy eyes and other factors would have been present. I'd like to know if BATs were administered after any of his other crases in the past regardless of how minor of what the circumstances were. If not, it may have prevented this tragedy by identifying a problem before it came to this.

IIRC, the victims were stopped at a red light, wearing helmets, and the officer did not have his siren on.

Cannot remember the last time I have heard a police car working the siren. Lights, yes, but not the siren. LEOs?

Pascal, you poor pathetic soul. Try to pay attention, huh?>

The observations about the officer's alleged drunkenness/lack thereof were visual (at the scene). Two hours or more later, someone thought (duh) that he should've been blood-tested.

Again, I'm no scientist, which i why I called a nurse friend who does this test regularly. I'm told the science of the actual test (catch that, Pascal, “the actual TEST”) is reportedly quite good, so long as the chain of custody is hard-fixed and not refutable in court. Most cases which find in favor of the defendant, are because of evidentiary issues.

Oh yeah, I wish teachers' unions were better at pushing out their own bad apples. But they're a damn site better than the FOP. Praising with faint comparison.

I didn't know one way or the other so thanks for clearing some of it up.

Indiana law requires you to submit to a BAC test after a crash with injury or death. sometimes this can take a while just due to dealing with the scene, paperwork, injuries or the involved parties. if the person refuses then you have to go through the process of getting a warrant. when there is a blood draw an officer has to witness it and make sure the doctor/nurse uses a non alcohol prep. (thanks to lawyers) also the steps for a chemical breath test are even more complicated thanks tot them. there is a minimum time that must be observed and the time stats when you get them to the machine. because according to lawyers the subject could put anything in their mouth that “could” affect the test.
I am a certified test operator. have done dozens of DUIs. people act differently. I've tested people at a .08% BAC and act wasted. I saw a guy at a .33% that acted totally sober. he passed the field sobriety tests except for the nystagmus. He told me he drank a gallon of vodka every day. mostly while driving a truck for a living. your BAC goes down between .01 and .015 per hour. at a .33 it would take nearly a day and a half for him to reach zeros if he didn't take another sip. after you drink your BAC goes up for about 30 mins to an hour.
I didn't know this officer. only have heard of him. everyone said he was a great officer and great person. but he really fucked up and rightfully should go to prison.
that said the FOP initially has to protect all its members. at the next meeting a vote will be taken to extend that protection or end it. i predict it will be voted to end. officers are accused everyday off all kinds of offenses everyday. a very few true. some a misunderstanding, a few right out lies. also administrations have lied on officers wich need legal assistance. Peterson and Spears screwed 2 officers several years ago. the city had to settle that costing $600 grand. (that didn't make the new). even Abdul new that happened.

When you hear a siren and see flashing lights do you pull over into the right side of the street or the ” left turn lane”? Just askin since 56th is a four lane.

The evening news showed the damaged car with the contact appearing to me to be on the right front of the police car. The Star reported that the cyclists were in the left turn lane. I would assume that the police car should have been in the left lane and the cyclists in the right curb.

The light was red or just turned green as the cop approached and everyone was stopped. The cop evidently tried to negotiate the left turn lane but (as one report stated) the car struck and bounced off the raised median deflecting it into the 'left straightahead' lane where the bikes were.

The GIMPs don't seem to have any problems 'asking' civilians if they've been drinking. Look at all of the stupid commercials with LEOs asking “Sir, have you been drinking”? I suppose that they need to see someone swimming in booze before they ask, huh?

I don't understand the huge time delay to test Bisard.

I don't understand why the media didn't pound on Brizzi and the GIMP administration more. Softballs, indeed. Obfuscation abounds.

By law, BAC tests are required for any driver involved in a serious injury or fatal crash, whether or not they show signs of intoxication.

Think again. Indianapolis since 1996. i should clarify. everyone is suposed to submitt to a BAC test if there is an accident. a warrant can be obtained to force a blood draw only if there is serious bodily injury or death. property only, an aresst is made for dui even if there is a refusal. but, it's much harder to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
that whining got 2 officers paid 300,000 each.

For another poster. the FACT team is called on all fatal or possible fatal accidents. doesn't matter if alcohol is involvedor not. there is a 3 hour time limit to obtain that test. sometimes due to injuries, if a warrant is needed and just the complexity of the investigation it can take every bit of the 3 hours.

The Star article reeports the two hour time delay as usual. Not true. Most BAC levels spike about 1 hour after last drink. By the time two hours rolls around the body is working its way down. All signs point to an “oh sh*t” moment. The alcohol swab tainting the test to this degree is simply ridiculous.
Let's please remember to stand behind our officers that help and protect this city every day and thoughts to these poor victims.

While I certainly agree that he should've been tested at the scene or shortly after (apparently just like others involved were), I don't agree on Brizzi. I'm not exactly sure why the vehicular homicide charge isn't the lead charge, but he's doing an okay job so far on this one.

The skid marks begin just a short ways from the probably impact and the raised median (guess 4-6 inches high) has a pretty good chunk of concrete torn out of it where the skid marks meet the median. All vehicles were headed West on 56th (if I found the right place) and it is likely that both westbound lanes were blocked by cars awaiting the red light to turn green…e.g. they did not have anywhere to go to get out of the way? The cyclists were in the third lane, a turn lane to head South?