Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NoMoLerking t1_j02aud6 wrote

Reply to comment by No_Tie3538 in Natick police officer pleads guilty in sexual assault of co-worker; Still has his job. by ak47workaccnt

Basically impossible to fire a cop until they’ve been convicted.

4

RevengencerAlf t1_j02fk1x wrote

As a collective they have worked hard over decades upon decades to protect themselves from any kind of accountability and every allegedly "good" cop is still a part of this problem.

If they work in a dept with these policies and don't actively campaign against t hem and run to upened their union's protection of corrupt cops, they are also corrupt cops.

9

NoMoLerking t1_j02fuky wrote

I mean…okay?

I’m just saying that they really can’t talk about firing him until he’s convicted, and even after that it takes time. If he’s suspended without pay it’s functionally the same.

−6

RevengencerAlf t1_j02hvzk wrote

And I am saying that the reason they can't is because it's a corrupt system full of exclusively corrupt people.

Police are better protected from losing their jobs than virtually any other profession in America.

5

NoMoLerking t1_j02immc wrote

Because they have a strong union and almost nobody else does.

1

RevengencerAlf t1_j02km02 wrote

Yes and every cop who supports that union is a collaborator and accomplice to criminal thugs.

The strength of their unions comes from the public support they get from people worshipping these criminals like they actually add value to society.

11

TheGrandExquisitor t1_j02qlyv wrote

Ummmm.... Who else gets that level of protection?

It isn't most of us.

Don't lick boots. It isn't healthy.

4

NoMoLerking t1_j034ozc wrote

You should take a long look in the mirror and ask why you react so harshly to someone that’s just answering a question factually.

The town really can’t even start the process of firing a cop until they’ve been convicted of a crime or found responsible of repeated misconduct. It’s just how it is. Should it be that way? I don’t know. What’s the alternative? Police hired and fired on the whim of whatever politician won the last election? What about firefighters? Same arrangement? Teachers?

−6

TheGrandExquisitor t1_j0361vk wrote

No. It should not be that way. That is a no-brainer. We have cops literally murdering people in the streets. And when they are needed, like at Uvalde, they don't do shit. Very little accountability.

Also, teachers don't get near the slack cops do. Come on.

7

Maronita2020 t1_j02eg8c wrote

He's pled guilty though!

4

NoMoLerking t1_j02f91o wrote

Was he convicted?

0

TattooedPolitician t1_j02its4 wrote

He plead guilty. Pretty much means he admits the the allegations in the police report to be true.

8

NoMoLerking t1_j02iwua wrote

So once he’s sentenced they’ll start the process of firing him.

1

PakkyT t1_j03anr1 wrote

I doubt they have to wait until he is sentenced. Plea is entered, therefore he is guilty of a felony and is now a sex offender. The sentence in immaterial and the town should fire him immediately.

3

NoMoLerking t1_j03boeq wrote

So, I actually read the article. He’s been on unpaid leave and now that he’s been sentenced, the town is meeting to decide what to do.

I just hate the armchair knee jerk shit. None of us know what will get the town sued. They fire him in a way that’s not allowed by the CBA, they’ll get sued. You can be sure of that. He’s not on duty, he’s not being paid. He’ll be fired. Relax.

1

Positive-Material t1_j04hs0c wrote

Usually, the prosecutor gives them immunity from any real punishment for pleading guilty, so it's really a get out of jail free card.

0

No_Tie3538 t1_j02bzy9 wrote

Fuck that, no wonder there nickname is "PIG" WTF,???

3