Police Abuse

Suspended San Jose Cop: "Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given and law appointed right and duty to kill you."

|

Phillip White
CBS San Francisco

There are a host of issues that have to be addressed to effect effective police reform: overcriminalization, lack of transparency and accountability, union-negotiated protections, racism, and so on. In some states there's also the issue of self-defense. As a life-long resident of New Jersey, it always made me uncomfortable that the local super market could hire someone licensed to carry a firearm to protect their store but I was not permitted a license to carry a firearm to protect myself or my family. These, I suppose, are progressive values: you can exercise a right when you have the wealth to influence the state. New Jersey has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. But these laws, in New Jersey and elsewhere, rarely apply to law enforcement, on or off-duty. New York state recently passed new anti-gun legislation they forgot to exempt all police from and worked diligently to correct their mistake.

This disparity between the right to bear arms for the "civilian" and the right to bear arms for government agents is another issue that makes the questions of police reform so "complex" because it contributes to the sense that police officers and other government employees are a different class of citizen, with different rights and privileges, than those of us who pay their salaries.

Take this not unique attitude a cop in San Jose, now suspended over his comments, had no fear sharing publicly. Via CBS News:

In one of his tweets, [Officer Phillip] White said: "Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given and law appointed right and duty to kill you. #CopsLivesMatter."

In another, he said he would be off-duty at the movies with his gun if anyone "feels they can't breathe or their lives matter."

The tweets and hashtag played on protest slogans "I can't breathe" and "black lives matter."

Efforts to reach White through the San Jose Police Officer's Association were not successful.

The tweets and White's Twitter account have been deleted amid a social media firestorm over the comments. White's department, union and a college where he coached basketball all condemned the comments.

White was suspended with pay and not fired, not just because of the police officer's association but because California actually has enshrined job security for cops and other public employees into its state laws, be they unionized or not.

White talks about his "God given" and "law appointed" right to use lethal force in self-defense, confusing natural rights with government privileges not just because he's probably not that intelligent but also because of the systematic effort in this country by the establishment to confuse rights and privileges while curtailing natural rights like the right to bear arms from self-defense as much as they can get away with.

In California, Phillip White, who saw nothing wrong with going on social media to announce his right to defend himself and his family using lethal force in the context of peaceful protesters, and other law enforcement officials across the state enjoy the right to defend themselves and their families, on or off duty, using a service weapon paid for by taxpayers who the state treats like criminals when it comes to exercising the right to self-defense.

Parity between the rights and privileges of citizens and the rights and privileges of government employees is a crucial first step toward any kind of substantive change in the attitudes held by too many cops.

NEXT: Rejoice! Everybody Will Get to See The Interview, Even Without Theaters

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This guy sounds like a whoot to be around. I bet his kids despise him.

    1. Maybe. I’ve got a few friends who are cops. Most are generally rational, balanced people, until you start talking to them about police brutality. Then it’s like you just spit on Jesus and then strangled him to death using the American flag as a garrote.

      On any other issue, they can intelligently discuss it and offer insightful, nuanced opinions. On that one, they just lose their shit and claim that anyone who ever criticizes police is an insane person who wants all police officers murdered. I guess everyone’s got their ideological blind spot.

    2. Of course I can’t help but notice that their beliefs follow what their unions claim, to the letter. I don’t know if they’re developing their opinions because of their unions or vice versa…but they’re definitely in lockstep.

      1. It’s not just the unions. The idea that only people with government badges should be armed is widespread. See the “Flight Deck Officer” nonsense for airline pilots carrying, and a recent Texas “School Marshall” law to give teachers badges.

  2. Love the police, you lowly civilians, or be prepared to pay the price.

    1. I hate the term ‘civilian’ when used to contrast the rest of the citizenry from the police.

      I give you the words of Robert Peel:

      “The police are the public and the public are the police;
      the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”

      My word to the local LEOs – I’m more of a cop than you are a soldier.

      1. “The government is US! It’s what a we decide to do together!”

        /progtard

        1. Actually, the government is “us.” Just not in the way statists think.
          “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
          They forget the “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it…” part.

      2. Think of it as “lay people” if you want. When cops use it, it’s despicable because they believe they are special. When non-cops use it, it almost always means lay people, non-cops, or whatever you want to think.

        I’m a programmer, and I sometimes use it to mean non-programmers.

        1. I’m a programmer, and I sometimes use it to mean non-programmers.

          Bah! Softsider.

          /end Tech rivalry

          In more bureaucratic circles (yes, just what you guys want to hear about). ‘Civilian’ doesn’t generally get used. ‘Citizen’ does come up as a shorthand for a member of the general public (though inaccurately, as it includes non-citizen residents, etc).

        2. I once heard a fireman use it. I let it slide because he was teaching a class I had paid for, and it was incidental to the subject matter, but I was like “are you fucking kidding me, fireman?”

      3. Cops ARE civilians! When the police are restricted from taking their badge and uniform off any time they want, saying, “Screw it, I’m done with being a cop.”, and go home (as I was when a soldier), then they can claim not to be civilians. Until then, it is just one more myth they use to separate themselves from the population they police furthering this occupation army mentality behind so many of these problems.

      4. I hate the term ‘civilian’ when used to contrast the rest of the citizenry from the police.

        It is accurate though. There is a divide between the Military/Civilians and Law Enforcement/Civilians.

        Military and Cops are uniformed and under not just the civil laws, but (in the case of the military the UCMJ) additional rules that govern them even when “off the clock”.

        To be honest, I can relate more to Cops than I can to most civilians.

        And before some internet wise guy jumps in … no that does not give bad cops a pass. Bad cops, like bad troops, need to be fixed or discarded.

        1. The only dude I knew from the service who believed the police to be “brothers” to the military was a meathead moron who not at all surprisingly became a cop.

          Everybody hated him.

          And no buddy, cops aren’t held to a second higher standard like the UCMJ, if they were there would be fewer problem cops.

          And before some internet wise guy jumps in … no that does not give bad cops a pass. Bad cops, like bad troops, need to be fixed or discarded.

          Too bad police don’t do that.

        2. Really? When I was in the military no one thought of cops as anything other than civilians. Sure, they were by and large bigger douchebags than the other civilians, but they were still civilians.

          I laugh at your assertion that cops are under “additional rules” that would seemingly elevate them to parity with the military. Yeah, tell me another one.

          So let’s try that parity preposition out with a hypothetical. Bunch of cops at a hostage situation with heavily armed people inside and the only way to get to them being a direct frontal assault. The on-scene “commander” orders milling cops to rush the position and continue to do so until the position is taken. Milling cops tell on-scene “commander” to go fuck himself and go back to milling. Hostages die. Siege drags on.
          Which additional rules are the cops to be punished under for disobeying a direct, lawful order?

          It’s OK. I’ll wait.

        3. 22 year navy veteran (retired with 4 stripes) who respectfully disagrees. The military in this country accedes to civilian oversight without question. The statements by the NYPD union president and police in general lately consider the civilian authorities as an impediment and superfluous. I do NOT see anywhere near the professionalism and honor in the police community that is very evident in the military.

        4. Military and Cops are uniformed and under not just the civil laws, but … additional rules that govern them even when “off the clock”.

          Even if I grant that these distinctions are important, which I wil not, are these the only two professions that are uniformed and governed by additional rules when “off the clock”?

        5. Huh….16 years active duty and I’ve never heard anyone in the enlisted or officer ranks relate to cops. Maybe that’s just the Marine Corps.

  3. Needz moar BOOYAHS!

    1. BOOYA Dunphy tears of fear and frustration

  4. Dang, Ed. Awesome article. The best I’ve seen on the true root causes of our budding jackbooted goon state.

    the sense that police officers and other government employees are a different class of citizen, with different rights and privileges, than those of us who pay their salaries.

    the systematic effort in this country by the establishment to confuse rights and privileges while curtailing natural rights like the right to bear arms from self-defense as much as they can get away with.

    Just excellent.

    1. Agreed. Thanks, Krayewski.

        1. I fourth it.

    2. “Budding” jackbooted goon state?

      Actually, I think it’s starting to wilt.

  5. [H]e said he would be off-duty at the movies with his gun if anyone “feels they can’t breathe or their lives matter.”

    Oops, someone let the mask slip. Let’s see if they make him issue a non-retraction, or if they double-down on this.

    1. FTA: White’s department, union and a college where he coached basketball all condemned the comments.

      1. But didn’t fire him for them.

        They need to get a guy with an attitude like that back on the streets “protecting and serving” right away.

        1. Maybe, or maybe they can’t fire him because it’s California and it’s almost impossible to fire a government employee there.

          1. Does it really matter that he wasn’t fired because of his government boss, his government union or his government laws?

            The shitbag is unaccountable for his actions and is still getting paid. He will soon be protecting and serving again.

            1. It matters in a lot of ways, actually.

              His department may decide to keep him off the street even if they can’t fire him. His union may decide not to pay for his lawyer lawyer at a criminal trial. Hell, his union might be able to expel him even if his department can’t fire him, but I doubt that will happen.

              Furthermore, if he knows his chief and his union rep aren’t on his side, he might actually reign in his behavior.

              No, this is not a substitute for true accountability, but it is better than an open endorsement.

              1. paid Christmas vacation= punishment

          2. It’s not California with its government employees in general, it is the Peace Officers’ Bill of Rights pushed by the police unions and passed into law by a compliant legislature. Most states have a version of this now.

        2. Fired for expressing his opinion (or blather), nice protection of freedom of expression.

  6. But what does Bernie Kerik think? Will this enable him to solicit more bribes?

    1. I have it on good authority that Bernie Kerik thinks BOOYA!

      hth

  7. “Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given and law appointed right and duty to kill you. #CopsLivesMatter.”

    Question:

    Does a person have the right to self defense when threatened, or does one need to be attacked? Or does one need to be threatened AND have the belief that their lives are actually endanger?

    Threaten doesn’t seem like the right word, as it implies that the pig may kill a person for simply saying, “I’m going to beat the shit out of you.” That’s a threat. But I don’t think it gives him the right to self defense.

    1. how about if one of us tries it? I don’t have a huge problem with the sentiment – if someone threatens my family, I may not be calm about it – but I don’t see it as a duty conferred by man-made law.

      1. I guess my point is that he’s wrong, regardless. Threatening him is not enough for him to kill you from either a legal or moral standpoint. Yet, the pig apparently believes it is. If he really believes that, it’s just one more example of how pigs believe themselves above the average citizen.

        1. Wrong, and the guy is sub-literate

    2. IANAL, but as I understand it, there has to be a credible threat. IE, if I’m standing in front of you with a baseball bat and say I’m going to beat the shit out of you, you don’t have to wait for me to actually swing the bat to defend yourself. OTOH, if I say I’m going to grab a bolt of lightning out of the sky and smite you, you’re not justified I’m using violence.

      1. If you said that in front of a cop, he could shoot you, say he reasonably believed that you were Zeus, and avoid punishment for it.

    3. Well, as long as he extends that “right” to those who are threatened by someone who wears a police uniform with the nametag, “Ofc. Phillip White”.

    4. The classic formula is that lethal self-defense is justified only when you have a reasonable belief that the corpse-to-be is an imminent threat to your life or safety, or the life or safety of others.

      A mere threat is not enough (sorry, cops). It needs to be a credible threat of imminent harm. The “reasonable belief” standard introduces a level of objectivity that disqualifies “furtive movements”, etc. The shooter has an obligation to confirm, to some degree, that there really is a threat of imminent harm. This is where some of the high-profile cop shootings discussed around here fall short.

      1. You assume a “mere threat” can not be the same as a “credible threat” of harm. Unless your “mere” is baseless. Then I’d agree.

        If some true bad-ass says he’s gonna hunt my kid down and kill him, I could give a shit about anti-cop bigot’s opinion of what my right is. So now my rights are dependent upon societal blessing.

        1. Yes dipshit, your right to kill someone in self-defense is predicated on reasonable threat of imminent harm, just like everybody else.

          Just because you are a badged goon doesn’t mean you get to murder somebody for mouthing off because you think they are “a true bad-ass.”

        2. Of course, you being a crybully cowardly pig means you likely think everybody you encounter is a “true bad-ass.”

          Right?

  8. Many in law enforcement live in a bubble. The culture in which they swim daily tells them this attitude is not only acceptable but should be announced to all.

    1. Bingo. Cops are a heavily insular tribe.

      As anyone reading Dunphy’s rants will realize.

      1. Yes they are. My father was a probation officer and we lived in a small town. I got away with a lot of shit growing up because the cops all knew my dad and if I was polite they let me off with a warning.

        It was quite a shock when I moved away and had my first encounters with cops who didn’t know who I was. Fuck they were dicks.

        1. Yea they were the dicks not the prima donna who expects white gloves treatment. If you can’t handle your booze and drugs don’t use them. That’s a great way to not have to worry about how nice the cops are.

  9. Theses welfare rats need to get off the welfare rolls, get a job and start making money on their own. They sit around the house all day, having babaies to get raises on their welfare and loot and destory their own towns in protest. All this despite the FACT the loser thug punk that was killed raised a GUN to a POLICE OFFICER! Typical jungle mentality of he animals they are.

    http://www.AnonWayz.tk

    1. I detect a schism in the robot population

    2. Theses welfare rats need to get off the welfare rolls, get a job and start making money on their own. They sit around the house all day, having babaies to get raises on their welfare and loot and destory their own towns in protest.

      Are you describing the cops, or someone else here?

      1. Well done sir!

  10. “God given” and “law appointed”

    These are two different things. (I believe “god given” and “natural” are interchangeable in regards to describing rights.)

    because of the systematic effort in this country by the establishment to confuse rights and privileges while curtailing natural rights like the right to bear arms from self-defense as much as they can get away with.

    So goes the story of government in practice vs. what it is supposed to be. Also, this will tend to happen when the concept of “positive rights” (ie. government granted rights) is thrown into the mix.

    who the state treats like criminals when it comes to exercising the right to self-defense.

    Proles have no rights.

  11. Any word or deed which diminishes a policeman’s delicate feelings of self-worth should be deemed a mortal threat, and responded to with lethal force.

  12. “Suspended with pay”? Now hold up, dunphy assures us that is unpossible

      1. heh!

        *booya

  13. I can easily imagine a situation where someone who came through our ED gets all crosswise with one of our ED staff.

    If that staff member were to tweet:

    Threaten me or my family and I will use my God given right to kill you.

    I will be at the movies with my gun if anyone feels they can’t breathe or their lives matter.

    They would be fired on the spot, and blacklisted for rehire. Probably also a complaint filed with their licensing agency. None of this “suspended with pay” crap. Gone.

    Why suspended with pay, anyhow? Suspended pending . . . what? I don’t see any investigation needed here, so what are they waiting for?

    1. They would be fired on the spot, and blacklisted for rehire. Probably also a complaint filed with their licensing agency. None of this “suspended with pay” crap. Gone.

      Your hospital has standards. The government doesn’t.

    2. They’re waiting for the publicity to die down.

    3. I live just outside of Frederick, MD where a clutch of off duty cops working a movie theater crushed a man with down syndrome’s windpipe because he wanted to see the movie twice and he hadn’t paid for a second ticket. Chief came out and says there won’t be an indictment.

      The cops don’t even have to be on duty to snuff you out and they probably didn’t even lose their moonlighting gig at the theatre.

      There probably should have been riots over this one. And the local papers wouldn’t touch it because they don’t want to piss off cops that give them all their leads. It broke national for 15 minutes (reason had a Hit&Run; about it, too).

      Anyway, it’s part of what irks me about this constantly being turned into a racial problem. It’s divide and conquer and smokescreen the real issue: They can kill anybody for anything and not even face a trial 9.3 times out of 10.

  14. So a pig named White publicly makes veiled racist threats.

  15. Utter bullshit

    Please provide me with PROOF HE WAS ‘suspended with pay’

    If he was being paid, he was not on suspension

    He was likely on admin leave, such as BEFORE discipline is handed down, as is done in some investigations for a host of reasons as well as in other situations (cop gives Cpr to baby that died in her arms etc)

    I will say this again because people are clearly too stupid to grok this in lowercase.

    I HAVE YET TO FIND ANY EXAMPLE IN THE USA WHERE A COP WAS EVER ‘SUSPENDED WITH PAY’

    Ed calls this cop ‘stupid’ so I’ll tell Ed ‘hey stupid, he was NOT suspended with pay ‘

    I challenge Ed to find PROOF that he was ‘suspended with pay’ and since in most jurisdictions police discipline records are public record especially as to punishment when a complaint is sustained it should be easy to prove that he was suspended with pay since the Police Department will have official records of it available under freedom information act

    I have done several disclosure requests to several police departments including about police discipline and have never had a problem getting these documents

    So put up or shut up and show me any proof that he was suspended with pay

    If he was actually suspended that as a punishment that always includes lack of pay since without it it is not a suspension by definition

    1. By The way I found three articles already and they all said he was placed on administrative leave not suspension so I doubt that it is correct and when the investigation is completed and if punishment is meted out and it is this is a suspension it will be without pay and I am reasonably confident Ed/Reason will not issue a correction or change this article but occasionally I am surprised by peoples honesty

      Here’s a hint : this kind of investigation usually takes at least a few weeks if not months so chances are as the other media articles are stating that he is currently on ‘administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation!’

      I will wait for a correction/apology (rolls eyes)

        1. A typical reason response to truth

          Again, this is not opinion. It’s fact. But the responses are truther/creationist’esque when anybody dare challenge a sacred religiously held belief of an Anticop ideologue

          1. Angry you are becoming.

            SMOOCHES

            1. I took a shit in The artist known Dunphy’s mouth once.

              1. it’s still there

      1. I found three articles already and they all said he was placed on administrative leave not suspension…

        Yet, curiously you link to none of those articles yet expect a correction/apology based on your say-so. You’ve spent too much time in the police echo chamber, dunphy. Your word is worth exactly zero here.

        And from our POV there is no difference between admin leave and suspended with pay – we’re still paying his salary to sit on his ass.

        HTH

        SMOOCHES!

        1. Again there is no such thing as suspension with pay and if Ed has any intellectual honesty whatsoever he will either admit his error or he will provide proof.

          Period

          1. there is no such thing as suspension with pay

            Google “police suspended with pay”. There are innumerable articles contradicting your claim.

            Just to pick one at random:

            http://www.nj.com/middlesex/in…..aries.html

            Under state rules, police officers must continue to receive pay while suspended unless they’re charged with a duty-related fourth-degree crime, a crime of the third degree or higher, or a crime of moral turpitude.

            1. Articles don’t prove anything since they often make the same error that Ed is making again there is no such thing as suspended with pay

              Source documents prove it

              How many times did you read articles about firearm issues where they use similar fake terminology etc. it does not prove the point

              Have you ever seen an article that refers to a semi auto automatic rifle as an automatic rifle I certainly have

              Is that semantics?

              1. So these guys don’t know what they are talking about either?

                N.J.S.A. 40A:14-149.1 provides:

                Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, whenever any municipal police officer is charged under the law of this State, another state, or the United States, with an offense, said police officer may be suspended from performing his duties, with pay, until the case against said officer is disposed of at trial, until the complaint is dismissed, or until the prosecution is terminated; provided, however, that if a grand jury returns an indictment against said officer, or said officer is charged with an offense which is a high misdemeanor or which involves moral turpitude or dishonesty, said officer may be suspended from his duties, without pay, until the case against him is disposed of at trial, until the complaint is dismissed or until the prosecution is terminated.

                http://edpdlaw.com/suspended.html#.VJsaeMAOEA

                1. You forgot “hth”.

                  It h, RC. It really h.

              2. semantics: suspension ? administrative leave

                Especially when there is pay involved.

                Either one means getting paid to not work. A protection racket for sure.

                I just walked down the hall and asked my boss what I’d have to do to get “paid, administrative leave” or “paid suspension”.

                Her answer?

                “Do anything you think would qualify. But, we only fire or give days off without pay as discipline. Look in your employee manual. So, be prepared for those.”

                And, you know what? I’m a local government employee in California. Just not a LEO. ;-(

            2. You mean Dunphy lied again!?!?!

              He lies so frequently, I am starting to wonder if he is a pathological liar rather than merely being someone who doesn’t particularly care about being truthful.

          2. And…you have yet to produce even one of those three alleged articles.

            BOOYAH!

      2. administrative leave not suspension

        What we call in the legal biz “a distinction without a difference”.

        1. Not at all. for example it would be the difference between getting sentenced for a crime and being out on bail before the trial

          Is a guy who is out on bail before trial or for that matter a guy who is been arrested but not charged the same thing as somebody who has been sentenced I don’t think so?

          It is amazing the extent to which bigots will engage in evasion cognitive dissonance and every rhetorical trick under the book instead of simply saying oh wow I learned something and correcting themselves

          1. For someone who can bench Morgan Fairchild, that’s some pretty impressive contortion, dunphy.

          2. So now they’re bigots if they complain about police brutality?

            You see yourself as that separate from the rest of society?

      3. By The way I found three articles already and they all said he was placed on administrative leave not suspension so I doubt that it is correct and when the investigation is completed and if punishment is meted out and it is this is a suspension it will be without pay and I am reasonably confident Ed/Reason will not issue a correction or change this article but occasionally I am surprised by peoples honesty

        Your grip on the English language is tenuous at best.

  16. Reason Canard(lie) #1: cops get suspended with pay

    (I have scoured records on over 100 IIU complaints including the lowest punishment (usually oral reprimand ) up to the highest (termination) as part of research for civil action)

    I have yet to find ANY case anywhere in the USA where a cop was suspended with pay

    There is no such thing. It is an oxymoron

    1. Stop with the semantic bullshit, Dunphy. I know it’s all you’ve got, but it gets old.

      “When the facts are against you, pound the law. When the law is against you, pound the facts. When both are against you, pound the table”. You’ve about pounded that table into dust.

      1. It’s not semantics

        Suspension is a form of punishment handed down after an investigation is completed

        Other forms of punishment include written reprimand oral reprimand demotion and termination

        Administrative leave which is with pay is in no way shape or form a punishment and has nothing whatsoever to do with suspension. it is a process that is used for any number purposes both in investigations and in situations where an officer is not accused of anything wrong whatsoever but is given time away from the conventional duties for emotional health reasons

        I was given administrative leave once after I was involved in a very traumatic shooting where I did not fire a single shot and was under investigation for nothing whatsoever however I felt that I was too affected by the incident to do my job so I requested it I took some time on admin leave to reflect etc. and then came back

        Do you get the difference?

        1. This is Bo level word games. It fun to watch you become unhinged you fascist prick

          SMOOCHES

          1. Find me one court that has ever taken judicial notice that suspension and administrative leave are the same thing

            1. Unhinged you are becoming.

              Laughing I am

              SMOOCHES

        2. Suspension is a form of punishment handed down after an investigation is completed

          Also, what is done while the investigation is ongoing.

          Patrolmen Anthony Sarni, who earns $120,000 annually, and David Pedana, who makes $89,000, were suspended in October 2013 over unrelated episodes of alleged misconduct.

          Township officials signaled their intention to fire the two in May of this year, sending the officers letters saying they were entitled to defend themselves at departmental disciplinary hearings.

          But those hearings, akin to trials, have yet to take place. Moreover, they haven’t even been scheduled, according to members of the department.

          http://www.nj.com/middlesex/in…..aries.html

      2. This, this, a thousand times this. Thanks Andrew.

        1. I would expect evasion and evasion when a bigot and ideologue is confronted with the truth they do not want to deal with

          You can squirm and evade all you want just like a radical feminist or truther or creationist would when presented with facts but the fact is that there is no such thing as a suspension with pay and a suspension is a punishment and administrative leave is not

          1. I would expect evasion and evasion when a bigot and ideologue is confronted with the truth they do not want to deal with

            Me, too. Which is why I expect more evasion from you over the truth that cops are suspended with pay, for long periods of time, while the “investigation” is “ongoing”.

            Your department may draw a distinction between administrative leave and suspension with pay. Not all do. Obviously. So you can stop with the categorical statements that it never happens. It obviously does.

      3. Stop with the semantic bullshit, Dunphy.

        So Dunphy is Bo. There’s a frightening thought.

        1. Even Bo can articulate a good argument. Dunphy is just a child throwing a temper tantrum. But this level of semantics is Bo level derp.

    2. I have yet to find ANY case anywhere in the USA where a cop was suspended with pay

      Yet one of the top hits in a Google search for “police suspended with pay” takes you straight to an article noting, correctly, that NJ law specifically calls for suspension with pay when cops are accused of committing crimes on duty.

      1. I am starting to understand why police investigations of their own appear to be so slapdash and incompetently conducted.

    3. Oh, look, “canard” is back. LOL

      1. Aren’t canards the prime source for foie gras?

    4. Woooooo boy! Fifth Avenue Families Representing, you all better all step down, cause OH Dunphy will jack you all up if you don’t respect the colors!

  17. My rules of engagement wrt to officers:

    1. Don’t call the cops.
    2. Don’t interact with cops. Shun them.
    3. If cops are around, leave as quickly and quietly as possible. My life is at risk every second they are around.

    Have a cop-free Christmas.

    1. Cool. We get paid by the hour, not per call for service, and I am sure no cop anywhere ever lamented not getting to spend time with you

      Merry Christmas!

      1. Christ, what an asshole.

    2. Have a criminal free Christmas everyone!

      May it be uncontaminated by thugs of all types ie. by both the state-sanctioned gang-bangers and the freelance crooks!

      1. Best regards, tarran. Salute.

  18. Reason lie 101: a cop was ‘suspended with pay’

    If true, should be EASY to prove

    No proof will ever be provided

    When cops are suspended it is an easily obtainable public record

    I have NEVER been suspended but have taken admin leave several times

    I have REQUESTED admin leave before

    Nobody REQUESTS suspension

    Another operative difference is that a suspension can be used against you such as many police assignments require that you have had no suspension within the last five years for example they could never say no administrative leave since that would be a gross violation of your rights etc.

  19. Notice Dumphy doesn’t address the real story here about a cop who thinks he can just shoot people he imagines to be a threat. Or how it’s impossible to remove this scum from the police force. If anyone else other than a govt employee posted this shit they would recieve a visit from our heros in blue and be thrown in a rape cage. Our heros just arrested someone for posting “Put wings on pigs”.

    Instead he plays word games. You are a pathetic piece of shit but its fun watching you get your panties in a bunch.

    SMOOCHES

    1. Rubbish. He very well may be terminated or not but that will be disciplined and he has not received the discipline yet and as usual idiots think that if he is placed on administrative leave that means he will not be punished in the future when the simple fact is Administrative leave and punishment are entirely different things and the former precedes the latter. you can see countless examples of officers who were fired who FIRST PLACED ON ADMIN LEAVE

      1. Keep it coming. Your tears are amusing

        SMOOCHES

  20. Media constantly get all sort of stuff wrong and just because an article uses the terminology does not mean it is the case

    I can find articles referring to suspension with pay just as I can find articles that refer to a Glock as an automatic handgun it does not therefore become a fact

    I can find articles that say a jury found a man innocent but again that is not correct it a jury cannot find a man innocent

    I can find articles that say a man was arrested for homicide when there is no such crime as homicide and homicide simply says a death is the result of human action but not that any criminal culpability attached as opposed to say negligent homicide or motor vehicle homicide or etc.

    1. I can find articles that say a cop isn’t responsible when he drops a flash bang in crib.
      I can find articles that say a cop ins’t responsible when a cop kills a 12 year old with a toy gun.
      I can find articles that say a cop isn’t responsible when a cop kills a buy for picking up a toy off a Walmart shelf.

      I can find Dunphy defending our heros in blue and playing word games. Your tears are delicious.

      SMOOCHES

  21. so cops get to issue terroristic threats? it’s a crime. where’s the law enforcement?

    1. False. I had a former coworker in Maui PD get 10 yrs fr threats

      However THIS kind of threat would not be criminally prosecuted as a general rule since it does not meet the true threat standard under Brandenburg

      There have been countless cases of people making advocacy searches kill the carbs and as a general rule those are not prosecuted and if anybody tries it will be thrown out

      I am aware of one arrest already for such a case and I already opine that it was unlawful arrest

      RESEARCH: BRANDENBURG and TRUE THREATS

      1. it is a crime. principles not principals.

      2. So it was wrong to arrest a guy for posting “Put wings on pigs” on Facebook?

        Of course that guy was thrown in a rape cage not placed on suspension with pay.

      3. Brandenburg isn’t about true threats, it’s about incitement. This case isn’t about either.

  22. Again, I’ll be surprised if there is intellectual honesty here but hope is the thing with feathers

    Here is the last thing I’ll say absent proof or a retraction:

    If and when this officer is found to have violated department policy etc. by their internal affairs unit then a punishment will be handed down!

    I strongly suspect this officer will receive a suspension if not a termination.

    If I were a betting man I’d say I was about 85% confident he will receive some sort of suspension or termination

    I will report THAT when I become aware of it

    Suspension with pay is no more valid a concept then an arrest for homicide or a jury finding a man innocent A semiautomatic handgun being referred to as an automatic weapon but you will see all those errors repeatedly

    1. a criminal act is not an HR problem. this guy is a terrorist. he should be arrested and tried.

    2. Again, I’ll be surprised if there is intellectual honesty here but hope is the thing with feathers

      As an exercise of intellectual honesty, then, you will review the NJ statute above that specifically calls for suspension with pay pending the outcome of the complaint, and admit you were wrong?

      1. Here, lemme quote that statute for ya:

        . . . said police officer may be suspended from performing his duties, with pay, until the case against said officer is disposed of at trial, until the complaint is dismissed, or until the prosecution is terminated . . . (N.J.S.A. 40A:14-149.1)

        1. BUT THATS ADMINSTRATIVE LEAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          RETRACT YOUR OBVIOUS ATTEMPT TO SLANDER OUR HEROS IN BLUE!!!!!

          BOOYAH SEMANTICS

        2. I noticed that Dunphy has not bothered to specifically respond to any statutes presented as proof. But he keeps responding everywhere else…Ignoring the truth does not make it go away.

          1. Because all he has going for him is screaming and throwing poop like a monkey. He can’t react to facts because facts mean nothing at all to him.

          2. Notice the fuckstain disappeared?

            Well done R C D. That brought a tear to my eye.

            The know it all, loudmouthed, bombastic, braggart pig runs away like a little girl after being thoroughly refuted.

            I real man would say, “I stand corrected.” Not Mr BOOYAH, he goes on to confirm every pig stereotype there is.

        3. AND FROM RHODE ISLAND:

          TITLE 42
          State Affairs and Government

          CHAPTER 42-28.6
          Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights

          SECTION 42-28.6-13

          Suspension may be imposed by the chief or the highest ranking sworn officer of the law enforcement agency when the law enforcement officer is under investigation for a criminal felony matter. Any suspension shall consist of the law enforcement officer being relieved of duty, and he or she shall receive all ordinary pay and benefits as he or she would receive if he or she were not suspended. Suspension under this subsection shall not exceed one hundred eighty (180) days.

  23. Really appreciate derpfee coming along to shit all over a another thread.

    BOOYA

  24. From which part of the natural world do natural rights emerge?

    1. They don’t Tony. Natural rights in this case mean right arising out of our nature ie. the basic qualities inherent to human beings.

      1. And this doesn’t sound like circular bullshit to you?

        1. This may come as a shock to someone whose arguments are thoroughly impregnated with question-begging but few philosophical systems have circular reasoning playing a central role within them.

          You are right, though, in arguing that it often does sound bullshitty.

          1. Most or all philosophical systems have unprovable axioms at their heart, but natural rights proponents want to claim that not only is there a specific set of such rights which can never be added to or subtracted from, but that they don’t come from a useful axiom but, as the name suggests, nature itself. This is of course hogwash. Rights are legal entitlements to do certain things, and when you say they exist in the absence of legal enforcement, you’re really saying that you want them to, which is fine, but be honest about it. It’s a much more useful way of looking at rights, as they can be added to when reasonable people decide it would be a good idea to do so. People advocating for God-given rights (the actual meaning of nature in this context), they’re really saying they think we should only have the rights they like, damn anyone else’s opinion. It’s extra credit for your preferences, unearned.

            1. Derpy derp derp of a Dunphy level. We are all now dumber for having read your derp.

            2. Rights are legal entitlements to do certain things

              No they are not. This would mean that someone other than myself owns me. Instead, “rights” are things that any individual human may exercise that does not cost another human anything to do so. I am sure this has been explained to you ad nauseum here. Learn to read & understand words, fuckhead.

      2. I’m not a big natural rights fan, but still, aren’t humans part of the natural world? Don’t our minds and our actions evolve out of nature? Aren’t humans “wired by nature” to act in certain and specific ways?

      3. It’s time to start treating Tony like the Plug. Any illusion of sentience on Tony’s part is just a reflection of a more complicated algorithm.

  25. By the way yes I think this officer should be punished and I think the punishment should be consistent with past precedent and the officers record of discipline if any

    If he has a clean slate I would say as a ballpark fig. 820 days suspension would be reasonable which is a loss of a month’s pay

    If he has prior similar incidents of Making threats et cetera then he should be terminated

    Hth

    1. I think he should be arrested like the guy who posted “Put wings on a pig” and placed in a rape cage.

      SMOOCHES

    2. I think the punishment should be consistent with past precedent and the officers record of discipline if any

      And here I think it should be consistent with what any citizen, regardless of their job, would receive.

      1. That’s because you’re one of the bigorati who doesn’t think cops should get special treatment.

    3. By the way yes I think this officer should be punished

      You don’t know the totality of circs!

  26. Cops are winning. Protesters are losing

    Merry Christmas!!!!!

    1. And, the tribal us against them cop attitude is put on display yet again.

      What a foul creature Dunphy is.

      1. Cops are hero’s and we serfs should kiss their asses at every opportunity.

        1. For the record, I once had a lot of respect for police until a friend of mine got run out of the force because he refused to back a dirty cop. That and the regular nut punches committed by our boys in blue and sanctioned by our governemnt.

      2. It’s a war out there. Citizens are the enemy. But the pigs are winning!

        He says it again and again. Why? He believes it with all his heart.

    2. protests and assassinations. what does losing look like?

    3. Cops are whining.

      We (non-cops) are winning.

      HTH

      SMOOCHES!

    4. Cops are winning-the individual rights of citizens are losing.

      Nothing in that to be merry about!

  27. Dunphybot 2.0 rides again.

    Spew some more rambling nonsensical bullshit at us.

    Don’t forget your appeal to authority corrupt ex convict bribe soliciting tax fraudster disgraced former cop Bernie Kerik; that’s particularly convincing.

  28. Jesus, Dunphy. What happened to you?

    1. I think this is a different person from the originalH&R Dunphy. His grammar, level of argumentation, and diction have all eroded dramatically, he doesn’t seem to remember past accomplishments he claimed repeatedly in the past(powerlifting), and he has dropped any attempt at even pretending to be a decent person interested on justice. I think this just a guy who picked up on the general persona and is using it to troll us.

      1. I agree. Francisco challenged him to post under the original handle, and he refused.

        1. Its not the original guy.

          Original Dunphy spoke in short clear sentences and tended to actually speak directly to people

          (i.e. he didn’t just post random screeds – he responded to people’s comments, engaged in tete-a-tetes; was mostly direct 1-1 communication)

          this idiot just blathers at random.

          it also overuses the very few quips (‘smooches’, ‘booyah’) that dunphy *may* have used a few times to such an extreme its apparent that its a ‘mask’.

          Probably mary, or Mtrueman or some other idiotic crank.

          1. The return of joe? heh

  29. What happened to you?

    A severe traumatic brain injury, I hope.

  30. Bad cops, like bad troops, need to be fixed or discarded.

    Get back to us when that starts happening.

  31. Yall have an awesome holiday weekend.

    Here’s hoping you don’t lay eyes on a single cop the whole time.

  32. White was suspended with pay and not fired

    Soooo, he got rewarded with a paid vacation?

  33. my classmate’s ex-wife makes $79 /hr on the laptop . She has been out of work for 7 months but last month her income was $15788 just working on the laptop for a few hours. navigate to this website………
    ????? http://www.netjob70.com

  34. I want to be suspended with pay.

  35. apparently, Officer White doesn’t enjoy First Amendment rights, though.

    1. The First Amendment is a constraint on the state. It’s not a shield protecting you against any and all negative consequences of your speech.

      Try calling your boss a brainless cocksucker, or your wife a whore, and it should help to clarify the difference.

      1. Man, we must have sister wives!

  36. Apparently, the Rights of “The People,” means. . . “The People Who Work For Government,” and not just regular Joes (or Janes, whatever).
    Or so Duh Gutterment increasingly reminds us. . .

    I’m thinking that We, the People, need to inform them that they’re very confused and need to sit down and have a glass of water. Maybe we could call an ambulance to transport them to get a 72-hour psych eval. . .

  37. My last pay check was $ 9500 working 10 hours a week online. My Friend’s has been averaging 14k for months now and she works about 21 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I

    tried it out

    OPEN THIS LINK IN YOUR BROWSER,,,,

    ??????? w?w?w.?J?o?b?s?-?S?i?t?e?s??.c?o?m?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.