Return of the Bad Apples
Miscreant officers are back on the force because the D.C. police department missed a deadline -- again.
|
Discussion Policy Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post. |
"IT'S ABSURD that we are stuck with them." So said then-D.C. Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly in 1994 about having to rehire police officers deemed unfit for duty, all because the city couldn't keep track of time. More than a decade later, the problem persists, and that is more than absurd. It is intolerable.
Seventeen officers who had been fired for misconduct are returning to the force after their dismissals were overturned in court. These were not instances in which a judge found officers not culpable or their punishment overly harsh. Instead, as The Post's Allison Klein reported this week, the department missed a 55-day deadline mandated in disciplinary proceedings. It is the same issue that was identified in a 1994 Post investigative series and that the District vowed would be corrected. Because it wasn't, the city must take back officers who are guilty of lying, double dipping, falsifying documents and misusing police powers. The very thought, as D.C. Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) so aptly stated, gives one "chills."
It's true that the cases predate Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier's administration, but she needs to do a better job explaining just how these mistakes occurred. After all, how hard is it to count to 55? What part of a deadline is so confusing? What does this breakdown say about the department's ability to undertake the more complicated aspects of law enforcement? Police officials shouldn't hide behind the confidentiality of personnel records to avoid providing a forthright explanation of what happened, who was responsible and what's being done to prevent a recurrence. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D), who has made transparency and accountability hallmarks of his administration, shouldn't wait for council oversight hearings to provide these answers.
Equally important is reassurance that these tainted officers won't be in positions where they could jeopardize the interests of the department or the public. Imagine the field day that defense attorneys would have if documented liars and cheats were to take the witness stand. Even scarier is to imagine entrusting the safety of one's family to these officers.


Discussion Policy