Policeman admits to drinking 18 beers and being on duty

Policeman admits to drinking 18 beers and being on duty

www.news.com.au

A POLICE officer who admitted to drinking at least 18 beers before going on duty to carry out a breath test has not been disciplined.

Instead, Senior-Constable Adam Reedy has been promoted – despite telling a court last month about a wild night in Cunnamulla that ended with him knocked unconscious after trying to arrest a woman.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Police asking for our help? Report drunk drivers. Call 911?
The Sad State of Policing This Nation

A racist police officer who admits he was drunk, was knocked unconscious while attempting to arrest another patron at the bar.

And not only is he not disciplined, he's then promoted!!

This is definitely evidence for the police conspiracy to uphold "The Blue Code of Silence."

Promoted!! :shk:



www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

Edit to clarify the status of the arrestee, the article didn't specifically state she had been drinking.

[edit on 24-3-2008 by goosdawg]

reply to post by goosdawg


Vigilantes for teh win!!

I want to follow cops around with a radar gun and video camera for like a month. Just tape them pulling illegal u-turns, harrassing citizens, and speeding for no good reason.

reply to post by Sublime620


Good idea!

Just make sure the data is streamed via a secure uplink to a remote database.

Otherwise your evidence could be "lost" when they notice and turn on you.

They don't like being held accountable to the "enemy" you know...

So, I've been thinking that there has got to be a way to track cop cars in real time....they all have special radio systems, etc. Could these not by somehow used to triangulate the positions of the cars in a given geographical region? This would be really useful info for regular citizens to have, especially since they can track our locations through our cell phones...anyone have any thoughts on how to implement a system such as this? I have only recently had the idea, and not had a chance to do any research yet.

We have got to find a way to stay away from the blue-ies, apparently for our own good!

reply to post by keeb333


I am sure there are ways. It could be useful but really unnecissary for most people.

I don't mind cops for the most part, but we need to end the corruption and hypocritical things they do. Every time I have a cop pass me on the highway going 100mph with no lights on I want to pull him over!

Until we put the police back in check, and remind them who they serve, we will continue moving towards a police state.

1.) I dunno about other states, but in TX, U-turns are legal as long as there is no signs saying otherwise.

2.) If you are going to follow cops to monitor, etc, be sure to have a police scanner that can also cover their TAC channels. Sometimes they are dispatched or told to respond or assist by dispatch or a superior, then called off. Sometimes after they are called off, they are told to respond again.

For example. Officer Ramirez is dispatched to a house where there is a fight. He responds, and upon arrival, everything is settled down. He lets dispatch no, and his back up the slows it down. All of a sudden, tempers flare, and sh** goes down the tubes. The officer needs back up ASAP. His back up then hauls it to the house.

It has happened to me.

3.) Officers are not required to have lights and/or sirens going. It makes them and other drivers safer, but it is not required by law. So that officer going 100 mph past you could be responding to a call.

4.) Sometimes it is better to go fast, but with no lights and/or sirens.

For example, an officer is responding to a situation where the criminal will escalate the situation if he knows that cops are on the way.

Another time I drove fast without lights and/or siren is when making a traffic stop. You can catch the speeder going the same speed he was clocked at or even faster of you pull up behind him announced. If you come up blazing, the driver will already have seen you, slowed down, and then argued the fact that he was going the speed limit when you pulled him over. Coming in stealth makes for an easier safer stop. Also, if drugs are involved, the driver may throw the stuff out the window when he sees the lights coming up. Once again . . . better to come in stealth.

5.) Officers are allowed to break certain laws if life or limb are in danger. This includes speeding, driving the wrong way on one way, running stop signs, yield signs, red lights, crossing medians, making u turns in areas marked no u turns, parking in a no parking, etc.

[edit on 24/3/2008 by xxpigxx]

reply to post by keeb333


And how long do you think such a system would be legal?

They'd outlaw it quicker than radar detectors.

They don't feel they should be required to answer to the people they're sworn to "protect and serve."

You think they'd allow themselves to be tracked?

What we need are cameras on ourselves and vehicles with a system like I described previously.

When LEOs know their actions are being recorded, they'll be more likely to check their thug egos and behave.




[edit on 24-3-2008 by goosdawg]

reply to post by goosdawg


Can we please limit your statement to power hungry LEO's?

There are alot of good cops out there who get a negative image because of the few bad ones that are make the news

reply to post by xxpigxx


Good points all.

Seems like, every time I've been pulled over, two out of three times, I never saw them coming until they lit me up.

How do they do that?

Stealth mode, indeed.

They don't have cloaking devices do they?

Of course, if they'd been drunk, I might have seen them sooner...

reply to post by xxpigxx


Agreed.

I'd say my experience with LEO interactions runs three to one favorable.

Of course, I treat them with respect, sign the ticket and be on my way.

If I'm speeding, I tell 'em straight up, yeah I was going too fast.

They've let me go with a warning several times just because I didn't play games and go, "What seems to be the problem, officer?"

I think you'll agree, that line will piss 'em off quicker than anything.

One time, because I was honest, I only got a ticket for blowing the stop sign, he waived the charge of driving on the sidewalk. (True story!)

You give 'em lip, and you're asking for trouble; they hold all the cards in the short term.

The times they've taken me in, hey, I deserved it, but I stayed calm and took my lumps, um...figuratively, not literally.

When I rail against cops, it's against the type that think they're above the law, like our example in the OP.

It doesn't make it any better when these idiots are protected by their own.

I can agree with you there.

Like I say. There are two reasons people get into Law Enforcement. Either wanting to help, or the power trip.

[edit on 24/3/2008 by xxpigxx]

reply to post by goosdawg

In that case, if I ever invent such a system, I'll keep it to myself!!!

Seriously though, i think there need to be much more stringent psychological evaluations for police candidates...too many power hungry a-holes are slipping through the cracks and into the job! It gives the good ones a bad name.

Originally posted by keeb333
Seriously though, i think there need to be much more stringent psychological evaluations for police candidates...too many power hungry a-holes are slipping through the cracks and into the job! It gives the good ones a bad name.

Here's a scary thought, maybe the thugs are what they're screening for!

We don't hear enough about the "good ones" anymore to know if they still exist.

Maybe that's part of the problem; we're only told about the things the MSM are directed to tell us.

Perhaps we're being led to believe that the police are nothing but thugs, to further keep us in line...