home

How low law enforcement has fallen

How low has law enforcement fallen?  So low, that an officer who was fired for indecent exposure was recently rehired by the same department he was fired from.

The State newspaper in South Carolina has this article on it.

This is truly unbelievable.

So, what is the background to this story?

Richland County sheriff's deputies responding to a disturbance about 11 p.m. on Nov. 6 in the 1300 block of Longcreek Drive in the St. Andrews area found Paige "completely naked standing in the parking lot and intoxicated," according to a department news release.

Two deputies on patrol said a female pedestrian ran and was screaming after seeing Paige, according to an incident report. The deputies said they saw Paige naked in a lit area of a parking lot, and that he tried to leave the area in his truck.

According to the report, the deputies found these items in Paige's 1999 black Nissan Titan: a drink containing alcoholic beverage and ice, an empty mini liquor bottle, a plastic bag with two pairs of women's underwear, a T-shirt, dark pullover sweater and a pair of gray sweat pants.

Deputies also found a .380-caliber Smith and Wesson handgun that had been reported stolen in Richland County in 1998, the report said, noting that according to an earlier report, the complainant then was Paige's wife, and that the gun was last kept with Paige's parents.

We have an officer, drunk, in public, who is naked in a parking lot and then when deputies arrived, actually tried to drive off.  The officer was summarily fired by the police department for which he worked.

So, why was he rehired?

The charge against Lenard Paige, 43, was dismissed because the officer who arrested him died before he could testify. Another officer involved in the case didn't show up for a later hearing.

Reaves, who was named interim chief less than three weeks ago, defended his decision to rehire Paige, stressing that the indecent exposure charge was dismissed.

This is your leadership in law enforcement at work, ladies and gentlemen.  Because the charging officer was dead and the second officer in the case missed a hearing, the charge against the officer was dismissed, AND, since there was no charge... no foul... put him back on the road!

This is disgusting.  What this teaches other officers is that there are only repercussions IF you get caught, and then, you won't have any repercussion at all if you can just get the charges to go away.

While this decision is utterly wrong, it is also a clear indication that there are people who lead our police departments who shouldn't be that position.

< Who is the real cop | An Utter Failure of Imagination >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Why single out cops? (none / 0) (#1)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Oct 13, 2007 at 12:59:03 PM EST
    This is disgusting.  What this teaches other officers is that there are only repercussions IF you get caught, and then, you won't have any repercussion at all if you can just get the charges to go away.
    You've just described all of America.

    Maybe because they should be (none / 0) (#2)
    by jondee on Sat Oct 13, 2007 at 01:26:11 PM EST
    held to a slightly higher standard than "all of America"; or dont you think so?

    And yeah, I'd be willing to pay a little more to insure that higher standard.

    That is, until I move into a gated, libertarian utopia with Sh*twater Security on call.

    Parent

    Sorry, if you are suggesting that cops (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Oct 13, 2007 at 04:55:22 PM EST
    (and pols, judges, etc.) should be held to a higher standard regarding, say, being lawful, than "all of America," then sure, I can see your point.

    But if you are suggesting that cops should have fewer rights than "all of America" when they have not been found guilty of something, then no, I don't agree with you.

    Why do you hate cops so much?

    Parent

    Chiming in.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Mon Oct 15, 2007 at 09:11:35 AM EST
    I used to hate cops, it's mellowed into a simple dislike/distrust.

    Now I hate the law...and lawmakers:)

    Parent

    Somthing worth noting... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Patrick on Mon Oct 15, 2007 at 02:14:52 PM EST
    and that seems to fit into the whole pattern of things this past week...  Perhaps there's some projection going on here.

    Parent
    for the simple fact... (none / 0) (#6)
    by Michael Gass on Sat Oct 13, 2007 at 09:02:38 PM EST
    ...that law enforcement officers are charged with upholding the laws.  

    When an officer breaks the law in a such a manner, they should be removed from law enforcement, and, never allowed back in.

    The officer wasn't found innocent of his charges, btw.  He had his charges dismissed because the charging deputy was dead and the second officer missed a hearing.  As the article states, the Sheriff is looking at reopening the case.  Good for him!  Sheriff Leon Lott has his problems, but, he has done pretty good overall.


    Parent

    of breaking the law in any manner.

    When an officer breaks the law in a such a manner, they should be removed from law enforcement, and, never allowed back in.

    If/when he is found guilty, then he should be treated accordingly.

    You know, innocent until proven guilty and all that.

    Parent

    Whether or not he's convicted and serves jail time (none / 0) (#11)
    by Michael Gass on Mon Oct 15, 2007 at 05:20:56 PM EST
    is immaterial.  There are witnesses (like, two deputies and at least one civilian).  That he did this is not in question, only if he'll actually be PUNISHED for it.  Like I said, supposedly the case is being reopened.

    Parent
    I dont "hate cops" (none / 0) (#4)
    by jondee on Sat Oct 13, 2007 at 05:12:57 PM EST
    Or America, the Troops etc etc

    Their fans and groupies on the other hand..

    As long as your hate is justified... (none / 0) (#5)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Oct 13, 2007 at 05:37:07 PM EST
    The point is (none / 0) (#9)
    by jondee on Mon Oct 15, 2007 at 12:44:56 PM EST
    not that they should have less rights, but whether they have more, all-too-easily abused rights.

    I think it's a question worth examining.

    Parent

    What was he thinkng? (none / 0) (#12)
    by AshleyA on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 08:11:38 PM EST
    Aren't police officers suppose to uphold the law? How is any criminal suppose to take him seriously when he arrests someone? Sure, people make mistakes  but you shouldn't be allowed a second chance; not in this case. He could've killed someone while he was driving intoxicated.