Now that actually makes sense. I wasn't thinking of it from an ARI perspective, and if that is the reason they gave for dropping him then I understand. I was looking at it from a purely, not convicted of a crime perspective.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
DUI arrest but not charged
- Thread starter agua1986
- Start date
Now that actually makes sense. I wasn't thinking of it from an ARI perspective, and if that is the reason they gave for dropping him then I understand. I was looking at it from a purely, not convicted of a crime perspective.
exNavyOffRec
Well-Known Member
I would have thought about that as well, but given the closeness to shipping and the unknown of what would be available later they may not have had that option. The USN policy is to drop if there is not time to let the legal system work through, and then reapply.
What isn't right is that while it doesn't meet the legal definition of "innocent until proven guilty", since he was never tried, the selection process in this case has completely disregarded the idea and intent of the 5th and 14th amendment. In essence, it's "guilty regardless of the innocence declared". It's a gray area legal opinion in the selection process that is one court case away from being a red-ass for the military.
Like I said, I get it. What I don't like is the slippery slope it can create. I know we can sit here and give anecdotal examples all day but using the numbers/statistics of it, what's to say the idea that people from south central LA are more likely to be gang-bangers than someone from Boise, so no more recruits from south central?
NavyOffRec brought up a good point though about no open civil/criminal cases. A guy I was supposed to ship to boot camp with got a speeding ticket on the way to the recruiters the day we were leaving. He had to wait, I ended up seeing him about a month later in Great Lakes. I don't think for the OP he was given the chance to ship at a later date.
As I've already pointed out to others, the military doesn't make him guilty of a crime by saying it won't take arrestees - it's being prejudicial, but the guy's actual legal status is adjudicated in the courts (where he was not charged and therefore not deprived of life, liberty or property). It's not a due process issue - the process ran its course. The military doesn't even perceive him as guilty, just more risky. One would think that after all these years, someone would have succesfully sued if the reasoning had any merit. I would imagine DoD probably runs their "hiring" practices through a JAG or 10 before they're promulgated. Based on that, the presumption should be that they conform to applicable law.
I already drank that kool-aid. Learned that lesson long ago.
Kool-Aid is Kontinuous.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Yeah, one bad CO does not make all COs that, but how many of you have had COs that got there through which version of "Sustained Superior Performance"
TRA(tm) Version- Did all required wickets, didn't rock the boat, never took any professional risks (no, I don't mean dumb shit in aircraft, I mean sticking their neck out to fix what was not right, even if it meant a black eye from the boss if he did not agree with you), but did good enough performance and had luck/timing on their side.
Actual Leader Version. Did all required wickets, said the truth and fixed wrongs even if unpopular with superiors, and had enough luck/timing to not get punished for fixing things that were wrong and speaking their mind/the truth when needed (not necessarily appropriate)
I've had about 50/50 of the above if they were my two choices to rank COs.
Some (2 HSL, 1 VT, 1 VAW, 2 Commodores, 2 CAGs) I'd follow into the gates of hell if asked. Others (2 HSL, 2 VAW, 1 Commodore) I wondered how the fuck they are the example of anything but don't rock the boat.
Doing the best thing for your career is not always the same as doing the right thing.
And as a recipient of a shit FITREP from "Arrest = Conviction" mentality, I think that some people need to put down the Kool-Aid.
And some of you, who are saying that "we have transcendant worldviews as LCDR/DH/CDR/CO" have had the same attitude since you were JOs.
TRA(tm) Version- Did all required wickets, didn't rock the boat, never took any professional risks (no, I don't mean dumb shit in aircraft, I mean sticking their neck out to fix what was not right, even if it meant a black eye from the boss if he did not agree with you), but did good enough performance and had luck/timing on their side.
Actual Leader Version. Did all required wickets, said the truth and fixed wrongs even if unpopular with superiors, and had enough luck/timing to not get punished for fixing things that were wrong and speaking their mind/the truth when needed (not necessarily appropriate)
I've had about 50/50 of the above if they were my two choices to rank COs.
Some (2 HSL, 1 VT, 1 VAW, 2 Commodores, 2 CAGs) I'd follow into the gates of hell if asked. Others (2 HSL, 2 VAW, 1 Commodore) I wondered how the fuck they are the example of anything but don't rock the boat.
Doing the best thing for your career is not always the same as doing the right thing.
And as a recipient of a shit FITREP from "Arrest = Conviction" mentality, I think that some people need to put down the Kool-Aid.
And some of you, who are saying that "we have transcendant worldviews as LCDR/DH/CDR/CO" have had the same attitude since you were JOs.
canav08
Final Select SNA OCS 08 July 12
Because Police are always right? Especially campus police who can be a bit overzealous and short on larger crime issues, looking to make a name for themselves to move up in their own careers, etc.
Sorry to be sarcastic but lets not equate an officer deciding to make an arrest and send up to the DA for charges with the kid actually being in the least bit irresponsible. Many cops have a "arrest em and let the courts sort it out" mentality. For 90% of the population, thats not a big deal. For those with military aspirations of almost any kind these days, it is. Either way that mentality is wrong in my opinion. Campus cops are often young and just getting their feet wet in the field which makes it even worse that some here seem to be blindly trusting the officers opinion. I don't mean any offense here but I've seen the inner workings of a campus police department and some prevalent attitudes among *some* them. They deal with so many drunks and alcohol related problems that they start to think that everyone who even has a bit in them is just about public enemy #1. A good police officer takes some time to understand what he has in front of him, considers past history and maybe even engages the subject in meaningful conversation where OCS or OTS could even come up. A reasonable/experienced officer would give a stern warning if it was not a big deal (this case seems to qualify) and remind the person that they don't want to ruin their career. Be a human being, not a blind machine looking to rack up the arrests and convictions. Throw 10 at the wall and if 1 sticks, great. Its a crappy way to move through any career. I have plenty of respect for police but the extent to which they are trusted on these matters, especially by high authorities in the military is sometimes worrisome.
Sure the military may be alot stricter and there may be alot of variables in other countries you may work in but thats just something we all have to deal with when/if we get in. You give up alot of your civilian "rights" to be part of something greater and to this novice, it seems like its mostly worth the minor inconvenience in some areas. Its just frustrating to see the same mentality applied to civilian laws where the enforcers are playing by an entirely different set of rules in a totally different culture.
Either way sorry to revive this, good luck to the OP and thanks for posting! This thread was a wake up call for me, I've never been the type to drink more than 1 or 2 beers on any occasion but never thought anything of driving after 1 or 2. Now I wont be driving with even a drop in me. I've only had one dismissed ticket in my life but I'm being more cautious in that area as well. It really does not take much more than being out late at night and making one wrong driving move to potentially get cuffs slapped on you for *suspicion* of DUI, drinks in you or not. Police have WIDE latitude in who and when they can slap cuffs on, if they want to do it for any reason or no reason at all, they can usually find a way. Thats why we have courts.
canav08
Final Select SNA OCS 08 July 12
ugh, law and order conservative republicans, I don't think anything scares me more. I see them as no different from liberals for all the talking they do about being so. Its about the protectionist culture and mainstream republicans are gladly joining with democrats more and more these days on the idea. Ban this ban that, ban guns, ban the ability for one to hurt oneself. Whats next, ban airplanes? Ban flying? You might die you know! Everything has a level of danger, some more than others. You can't legislate it away or run from it, that's what liberals do. I'm not saying its good to drive drunk but the whole "law and order" culture has gone wayyyy to far and it serves no public interest except to undermine individual freedom, the Constitution and put more control in the hands of the government. The role of government is to protect life, individual freedom and our country so that, of course, means a strong and robust military which even "law and order republicans" are starting to vote against nowadays.
I'm all for any service being selective but we are talking about an arrest that has been entirely without merit it appears. I'd also politely argue your points above that improper arrests are such extreme outliers. There are millions of cases of people being in the wrong place at the wrong time and getting cuffs slapped on them wrongly for doing nothing. Convictions? sure, use them all day everyday to discriminate from military service! Arrests are on such shaky ground you can't even stand on it.
Unlike military officers like yourself who are nice enough to share your wisdom with us wannabes, police don't have to worry about getting chewed out by their command or about very serious consequences when they screw up. Consequently, they are not overly concerned about arresting the wrong person and have no interest in not doing so unless out of the goodness of their own hearts. Unfortunately, the difficulty associated with the job tends to remove alot of the latter sentiment, still no excuse. Arresting somebody by accident is child's play, in my hometown, we recently had an off duty state trooper get off with zero charges for shooting a lady walking her dog while violating every hunting law on the books, not to mention firearms safety. If cops were held to the same standards in doing their jobs right as the military is, a good portion would not have jobs. Think of a similar level of F-up while flying, even something akin to arresting the wrong person, never mind shooting somebody, do you think you'd still be flying if you were lucky enough to still be alive? The arrest first culture goes right to the brass in most departments and many officers are treated as if beyond reproach. Some like to consider themselves "paramilitary", good one, they would not survive very long trying to move through the military as a officer/aviator with their professional attitudes they adopt as police. Many routinely do things that would get a military officer bounced out the door in the blink of an eye. The military higher ups apparently don't quite understand this yet. Respect the opinions of those who have earned respect (and yes that could include plenty of police officers) don't blindly take the words of cops looking to boost their arrest/conviction rates.
exNavyOffRec
Well-Known Member
No the don't, they actually have very little if ANY latitude when it comes alcohol, the other is domestic violence.
If a person is pulled over with a few drinks but say is .06 and the officer releases them then 1 mile down the road he plows into a car and kills someone guess who is liable, the officer, the driver, the city/county, etc...... it has happened before.
Good discussion, but a couple of points worth making. I'm not sure I'd equate "law and order" republicans with the nanny-state mindset you've described. Different group of folks in my view/experience. I would argue that most conservatives would prefer the government not tell them to wear a seat belt or motorcycle helmet. In fact, conservatives generally want the government out of their lives unless it has to do with religion, sex or whether it's a good idea for a gay man to marry his pet cat Fluffy (but that's a topic for another thread).
Second, when you talk about "millions of cases" of people being wrongfully arrested, I know you're just making a point, but that's probably not even close to the statistical reality. While I don't have an data in front of me either, I would wager from a conventional wisdom point of view that the number of people arrested and charged (or convicted) far outweighs the number of people arrested by mistake. Maybe someone will produce some data to prove otherwise, but I doubt it. The point being, the military looks at that statistical probability (I.E. most people arrested are charged/convicted of a crime) and makes a risk analysis based on those numbers - simple math.
Don't want to rehash the rightness or wrongness of the policy - it is what it is.
canav08
Final Select SNA OCS 08 July 12
No argument about those specific issues.
My point is that it is easy for a police officer to throw somebody in cuffs and there's your arrest. Nowadays, cops are well drilled on the typical coverall charges in their jurisdictions. They could easily arrest most anybody for something that would hold water in the eyes of their superiors even if thrown out in court. Anybody who thinks different has an overly rosy outlook on police work and how they do things. If a cops wants to get you in jail, he says you were swerving, says he smelled weed, says whatever. They are not accountable for things like that and their superiors would rather they "check it out" (aka ruin a life) than miss a crime. Even if the cop was being willful for some reason, its easily explained away in a routine police report. Again, won't stick in court but what the heck does that matter based on this thread?
My point is the police are not about to get reamed out because they haul somebody to jail that ultimately did not deserve it and the charges got dropped. I've seen police academy classes in person, it all starts there, the arrest first, sort out at station (after we have put all the life ruining arrest info into our computers) was a very common mantra. Its also the common attitude among my police friends. Policing is not what it was 20+ years ago. Not about getting the community on your side and trying to be somewhat down to earth and friendly to the majority that are good. Everyone is a criminal until proven otherwise. That mindset puts ALOT of people in cuffs and generates an arrest record. Is most police business serious response to calls for service? Yes! Are most arrests legit? Yes! Do the majority of people arrested deserve it? Yes. Does that mean that there are not a HUGE number of cases just like ones described in this thread? NO! Where I used to live the police had a policy that they had to haul 10 people into the station, in cuffs, for every DUI checkpoint. They stayed until they were done. Did not matter if you were borderline or not even drunk. They needed the press and the grant money and that was that. Police brass are subject to the same pressures from politicians as military brass and it has helped to corrupt officers on the street.
Brett327, yes, very good discussion! I'm gonna shut up because I've taken the thread far enough into controversy with my big mouth/opinions
I think the common ground is, of course, we understand that these policies are not always fair but it is what it is. Its just another thing that needs to be lived with and we need to be careful in our ways. To me, being afforded the potential opportunity to serve in any branch enlisted or officer is a privilege and one that requires adhering to higher standards. I might not agree with some of the assessments of recruits RE arrest but there is something to be said for needs of the Navy, force shaping, etc. I've complained enough and I have not ground to even complain so its time to shut my mouth, keep my nose clean and play the game. If anything, its just a reminder for me to live my own life more carefully and consider my decisions very carefully.
I'm sorry, but I find it amusing that you choose to stereotype all campus police departments based upon your experience at one specific campus P.D. Your experience is your own, and does not represent all police departments, despite what you might have experienced. You proved my point in your posts, most of the people are arrested for a reason. If there's a pattern of arrests, (regardless of convictions), it could be a good indicator of potential trouble for the candidate/recruit down the road. Despite your assertions, police officers are held accountable for their actions. They report to someone, just like every one of us does.
By and large, arrests are justified. Is our system perfect? Hell no, but it's what we've got.