-
How To Deal With Corrupt Police Officers
-
Another off duty cop who thinks he is above the law and has was absolutely 💯 confident if he got pulled over for suspicion of driving under the influence (DUI), the cop pulling him over would most definitely extend professional courtesy and turn the other way. Well, the drunk cop has thought wrong. Yes, Sir. Off duty cops are not above the law anymore. Police officers extending professional courtesy of. Off duty cops are taking a huge risks not just getting discovered by his supervisors at his department but the Chief of Police and the community finding out about it. Every drunk driving suspect needs to get tested and confirmed that the arresting police officer is absolutely 💯 convinced the driver the cop pulled over is sober and alert before the cop decides the motorist is no longer detained
If the cop let’s the motorist go without testing the motorist for DUI because the violator is an Off Duty cop, and the drunk cop gets into an accident which one or more passengers of the vehicle he crashed into, the cop that gave the motorist professional courtesy and cut him loose is going to be in a shitloads of trouble and potentially get fired by his police department, face official misconduct, and will get charged with involuntary felony manslaughter if there were a death involved. With that said, it’s best all cops should abide by the law and be a good law abiding citizen and police officer.
-
On this episode of GCA Forums News, an off-duty officer appears to be racing her friend down the freeway at MPH. They both pull over and are ran through FSB’s, where they both fail! GCA Forums News provides unbiased and authentic footage of incidents captured on body cameras. We believe this footage can be used as an educational and informational guide for viewers to analyze and evaluate situations. The videos on this channel have been obtained through Public Records Requests <We don’t publish footage that has already been published elsewhere unless we have significant new footage and information to add.
The featured content is NOT intended to be violent or glorify violence in any way. We are sharing the footage STRICTLY for the purposes of news reporting and education.
Thank you for watching, GCA Forums News!
https://youtu.be/qKd_cQ4SZWs?si=kEPW9_8EH6M50yIU
-
This reply was modified 1 week ago by Gunner.
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 15 hours ago by
Gustan Cho.
-
Here’s the latest analysis and recap of the situation in which police officers were afforded a courtesy extension, as reported by GCA Forums News.
Incident Overview
Event Summary:
The latest episode on GCA Forums News includes a clip of an off-duty police officer purportedly zooming down the freeway with a friend. This poses further scrutiny around courtesy and responsibility regarding law enforcement.
Sequence of Events
Racing Incident:
- The off-duty officer and a friend were captured on the freeway at high speeds that legally should be considered racing.
Traffic Stop:
- When both cars were stopped by police, the subjects were required to undergo field sobriety assessments (FSBs).
- The video appears to show both subjects failing the tests designed to measure the physical and mental orchestrating functions a driver would perform.
Body Camera Footage:
- GCA Forums News has secured body-cam footage of the officer’s interactions with the subjects.
- This footage is intended for other police officers as a teaching aid concerning responsibility and accountability in policing.
Purpose of Footage:
- This news source’s primary focus is to showcase violence, crime, and police activity within society.
- The goal is to help the public understand and analyze police actions critically.
Key Themes
Professional Courtesy:
- This incident covers the still unsolved case of professional courtesy within the police force.
- Do police officers show grace to one another when a civilian would likely receive harsher treatment?
Accountability:
- The failure of both sobriety tests raises issues of responsibility concerning the police regarding the expectation of order, especially when not on duty.
The GCA Forums News incident collects all of the underlying issues associated with police professionalism, ethics, and courtesy and blames them on the blurred lines of all these concepts. GCA Forums News continues to highlight events while providing balanced testimonials and arguments commenting on these occurrences with no attempt at concealment.
For further insights, viewers can access the full video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF4YkRY5mRs
-
This reply was modified 1 week ago by
-
GCA Forums News obtained lapel, dash, and in-car camera footage of a DWI traffic stop involving a Las Cruces Police Department off-duty officer Lourdes Hernandez. A New Mexico State Police officer was patrolling in Las Cruces, NM, and observed a vehicle speeding. The officer activated the radar and verified the speed of MPH in a 55MPH zone.
The officer activated his lights, and the car did not pull over to the shoulder. The officer approached the vehicle with a female subject inside. She stated she was an officer with the Las Cruces Police Department, and her duty gun was inside the glove compartment of the vehicle. The NMSP officer detected a strong odor of alcohol. She had bloodshot eyes and was chewing gum.The officer asked Hernandez to exit the vehicle. She explained that there was alot going on in her life and got into a fight with her boyfriend. Hernandez denied a field sobriety test and was arrested. She immediately requested a New Mexico State Police supervisor to come to the scene.
The supervisor came on scene and explained the policies of the New Mexico State Police on impounding her car and property. Hernandez stated she did not want to go through the process.
While on the call, the supervisor encountered a male subject who identified himself as a Las Cruces Police Officer and the boyfriend of Hernandez. The sergeant could smell a strong odor of alcohol on his breath. The boyfriend wanted to talk to Hernandez but was denied.
A Las Cruces Police sergeant arrived on scene and retrieved Hernandez’s police-issued firearm and property. She was then taken to jail to be booked.
Hernandez was charged with aggravated DWI first offense refused testing, speeding, and negligent use of a deadly weapon (intoxication).https://youtu.be/OnvOrWc370Q?si=9CYuytlniv6CDQSx
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 16 hours ago by Gustan Cho.
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 16 hours ago by Gustan Cho.
-
Here’s the El Paso Inc. summary based on the available information regarding the case of Las Cruces Police Department officer Lourdes Hernandez.
Las Cruces Police Department Case Summary:
Chronological Events:
Case Details:
- An NMSP (New Mexico State Police) officer was performing patrol duties in Las Cruces, New Mexico, when the event being reviewed unfolded.
- Once the individual was on patrol, they observed a car traveling at exceptionally high speeds, well over the 55-mile-per-hour speed limit placed on the road.
- The officer used the radar to confirm the vehicle’s speed and, after establishing it was indeed higher than the limit, turned on the emergency lights to stop the car.
- The subject vehicle did not immediately pull over as is customary, so the officer approached the vehicle only for the female driver to identify as a police officer from Las Cruces going by the name of Hernandez.
- She volunteered the information that she was a police officer and that her service weapon was located in the glove compartment.
- While the two were talking, it came to the attention of the officer that there was a residue of alcohol in the car and that Hernandez’s eyes were indeed red, suggesting that she had been drinking.
- She also had a piece of gum in her mouth, which she was likely using to cover the scent of alcohol.
Skipping Field Sobriety Tests
- While being instructed to get out of the vehicle, Hernandez reported feeling some personal worries owing to a prior fight with her boyfriend.
- Hernandez did not comply with the field sobriety tests and was thereafter arrested.
Looking For a Supervisor
For some reason, Hernandez wanted to call a supervisor from NMSP to the location, which showed that she understood the nature of the case somewhat.
Particular NMSP Supervisor
- The NMSP supervisor came, and they briefed her about the procedures to be followed regarding the vehicle, its contents, and the towing of Cheryl’s truck.
- Hernandez seemed willing to take the steps.
Involvement of Boyfriend of Hernandez
- As the supervisor was assessing the case, one male came in.
- He introduced himself as Hernandez’s boyfriend, who was also a cop from Las Cruces Police.
- The supervisor noted that he was also very heavily under the influence of alcohol.
- He was refused the right to speak to Hernandez.
Securing Property and Booking
- A Sergeant of Las Cruces Police arrived and, with assumption, grabbed Hernandez’s service pistol and her other personal effects and took her to book in the jail.
Filed Charges
A plethora of charges await Hernandez, which include but may not be limited to:
- DWI Aggravated (Driving While Intoxicated), First Offense (refusal to submit to testing).
Speeding Violations
- Negligent Use of a Deadly Weapon (in connection with intoxication).
Wrap Up
- This incident raises important questions regarding law enforcement accountability and impaired driving.
- This is especially concerning an off-duty officer.
- It’s a pending case, and there will be more developments as it moves through the judicial process.
For visual insights, you may refer to the footage available here.
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 16 hours ago by
-
Nobody should be above the law, especially POST-certified law enforcement officers. Let alone a police sergeant supervisor. On October 18, 2020, Florida Highway Patrol Trooper Anthony Moschetto was dispatched to the intersection of Centerville Road and Buford Blvd in Tallahassee, Florida, to assist the Tallahassee Police Department with a traffic stop. According to Moschetto’s sergeant, who related the message, the driver, later identified as Morgan Wysocki, was a sergeant with the Leon County Sheriff’s Office and was possibly under the influence of alcohol.
Moschetto arrived on scene at 11:50 p.m. and contacted TPD Officer Jonathan Scott. Scott reported that at 10:56 p.m., he had been operating his marked TPD vehicle, traveling south on Capital Circle at Centerville Rd, when he observed a red 2014 Jeep SUV, stopped on Capital Circle in the left turn lane to Centerville Rd. According to Scott, the vehicle was stopped for a steady red left arrow and proceeded against the red arrow through the intersection, making a left turn onto Centerville Rd. Scott conducted a traffic stop. Events proceeded as shown in this video. According to TPD Sgt. Wagner, he made the decision to turn the investigation over to the Florida Highway Patrol to avoid any conflict of interest due to the close relationship between the Tallahassee Police Department and the Leon County Sheriff’s Department.
Sergeant Morgan Wysocki ultimately pleaded no contest to the charge of driving under the influence. He was adjudicated guilty and sentenced to twelve months of probation with the possibility of early termination, fifty hours of community service (25 of which could be bought out at $10 per hour), DUI School Level I, a six-month driver’s license suspension, the Victim Awareness Program, vehicle impoundment/immobilization for thirty (30) days, court costs and fines, and general conditions of probation. Wysocki had previously been arrested for DUI at the age of 20.https://youtu.be/13SvZtvo4Ds?si=C8HjVQIacYPhF09M
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 16 hours ago by Gustan Cho.
-
Below is a GCA Forums News special that captures the events and evolution of the Sergeant Morgan Wysocki Leon County Sheriff’s Office incident as of March 22, 2025. The account touches on the fact that no one, not even POST-certified law enforcement officers with a clear obligation to enforce the law, should be free from accountability.
The account captures the facts of the case, details the first incident, and describes the legal complexities. It contemplates the aftermath and examines the case in every detail, deploying no fabrications.
GCA Forums News: Sergeant Morgan Wysocki DUI Case: A Series Of Unfortunate Events
Background: What Happened On October 18, 2020
- A seemingly routine traffic stop in Tallahassee, Florida, on October 18, 2020, at around 10:56 pm morphed into a major case of DUI of an SUV controlled by an overzealous law enforcement supervisor.
- Officer Jonathan Scott of the Tallahassee Police Department (TPD) was heading south along Capital Circle in his marked patrol vehicle when a red 2014 Jeep SUV stopped at a red left arrow.
- Instead of yielding, the Jeep executed an illegal left turn on Centerville Road.
- This led Officer Scott to approach the SUV for a traffic stop alongside Centerville Road near Buford Boulevard.
- Before Scott could approach the vehicle, he observed several signs of possible impairment that included the driver’s breath reeking of alcohol, red and glassy eyes, and slurred speech.
- Wysocki Scott identified himself as Sergeant Morgan Wysocki, a Supervisor with Leon County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO), and showed his badge and ID.
- Through his badge, Wysocki Scott also informed that he had a gun in his bag, which made the scenario more delicate.
- Considering the risk of bias because of the intimate working relationship between TPD and LCSO, TPD Sergeant Wagner reasonably transferred the investigation to the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP).
- FHP Trooper Anthony Moschetto was dispatched to the location at 11:50 pm.
- His Sergeant briefed him that the individual who was a suspect was an LCSO sergeant and may be intoxicated.
- When he approached Wysocki, he appeared to be having additional signs of intoxication.
- Therefore, Moschetto requested Wysocki to step out of the vehicle.
- Wysocki reportedly did not want to come out, stating verbally in an aggressive tone “no” repeatedly.
- After a lot of repetitional encouragement to step outside, Wysocki finally complied.
- Still, his demeanor and physical condition made Moschetto believe that he was intoxicated and unable to drive. He was charged on October 18, 2020, at 12:03 am, with driving under the influence (DUI).
- During his time at the Leon County Jail, Wysocki took a breathalyzer test around 1:46 am and received BAC results of 0.250 and 0.254, more than triple the legal limit in Florida, which is 0.08.
- An FHP sergeant informed the LCSO watch commander about the arrest to maintain inter-agency communication.
Legal Outcome and Sentencing
- As far as was documented, Sergeant Morgan Wysocki was charged with misdemeanor DUI.
- In the aftermath of the incident, he had a no-contest plea accepted in court, where he effectively agreed to face the repercussions even if he didn’t openly confess to wrongdoing.
The judgment reached had the following outcomes:
- The defendant is to serve twelve months of probation, which can end early.
- Fifty hours of community service, but can pay off 25 at ten dollars an hour.
- Attending DUI school level 1 and losing their driving license for six months.
- Participating in the victim awareness program.
- Paying court fees and other associated costs.
- Additionally, losing control of the vehicle for 30 days while still undergoing general probation.
- Lastly, set probation terms.
Not First DUI Offense for Police Sergeant
- This was not Wysocki’s first encounter with DUI charges.
- He was arrested at the young age of 20, but the particulars of that case are murky at best.
- This raises concerns regarding the patterns of behavior and the previous safety measures put in place.
Employment Consequences
- The internal investigation commenced after the Leon County Sheriff’s Office officially reported Wysocki’s arrest.
- LCSO PIO Shade McMillian said, “About this particular situation, Wysocki, a Sergeant, has been placed on Administrative Leave until the matter is resolved.”
- No other publicly available information from LCSO has surfaced to clarify whether he underwent involuntary retirement, demotion, or reinstatement, leaving his employment status uncertain as of March 22, 2025.
- The silence of LCSO within the ongoing investigation fails to explain this inquiry.
- It seems to disregard the expectations of constituents served by a commanding officer who left unmonitored, is capable of breaching the law and boundaries of his profession and suffering a corruption inferno—a violation of the laws of the land and ethical standards of his profession.
Broader Context and Implications
The matter presents dire implications regarding custodial power:
- No one is above the law and certainly not the POST-sworn law enforcement officers who take oaths to protect and serve.
- Wysocki was a sergeant, which meant he was in charge of a unit consisting of his subordinate deputies.
- Therefore, a culture of responsibility within LCSO was created.
- His driving with a BAC over 0.25 and resisting a police officer’s order during a stop while wielding his badge in October 2020 was a betrayal and a trust atrocious act.
- The TPD’s handing over this case to FHP showcases an understanding of the dynamics between agencies and an attempt to uphold fairness.
- On the other hand, it brings to light a troubling issue: the self-policing of law enforcement officers invites actual or perceived conflicts of interest.
- Although the collaboration between the TPD, FHP, and LCSO in this case was smooth enough to eliminate that concern, it still raises questions about how these cases are dealt with when professional courtesy might interfere.
- “Misdemeanor” sentencing of Wysocki includes probation, community service, and suspension of driving privileges.
- Remarkably similar to the consequences faced by DUI-willing civilians.
- This thin veneer of imposed punishment suggests little leniency due to his rank.
- The flexibility to purchase half of the mandated community service hours and the chance of being granted early termination of probation undermine whether an adequate punishment was levied on a sergeant for misconduct.
- Adding further complexity to the narrative is the fact he was charged with DUI at 20 years of age, suggesting a failure to impose earlier accountability may have prompted the need to address this incident.
March 22, 2025, Updates
- There are no new public updates on Wysocki’s case or his status with the LCSO.
- There is a lack of information on the results of the internal investigation, his probation completion (which was expected around the end of 2021 unless early termination occurred), disciplinary actions, etc.
- This is certainly an avoidance of public relations on the side of LCSO, as they did attempt to provide some basic information after his arrest.
- If no additional reporting comes out, it is uncertain whether Wysocki returned to duty, resigned, or was subjected to other undisclosed consequences.
- This absence of information also leaves little room to analyze whether such an incident would trigger LCSO policy adjustments like supervision changes, additional training on alcohol-related impairment, or off-duty conduct monitoring policies.
- Integrity is one core that law enforcement has to exercise.
- Without an explanation, LCSSO publicly invites distrust regarding one of its supervisory officers, Wysocki.
A Call for Reflection
- In the opinion of the readers of GCA Forums News, this story is beyond a legal matter.
- It encapsulates the failure of law enforcement and the enforcement of law. Officers, in the way that Wysocki is one, are not just people.
- They are representatives and, as such, have a greater influence on many, for good or bad.
- A sergeant who openly drives with 0 .25 + BAC on the roads of Tallahassee at greater than normal speeds is reckless, harms potential victims, degrades his agency’s reputation, and questions the equality of law.
No undue advantage was given to any party in this matter due to the professionalism of TPD officer Scott, FHP trooper Moschetto, and their respective sergeants attending to them. But with the case, some questions persist. What kind of policies do agencies have to deal with this foolishness? Is it that with prior DUIs, one becomes ineligible to serve in law enforcement? And in this particular case, why does LCSO seem to have nothing to say about what follows next?
There is no justification for escaping the law, and in the case of a POST-certified sergeant, whose job is to maintain the law, there is least of all. Accountability, if not evaporated already, is a term used less and less in this context. While the story fades from the headlines, the interest groups must shed their silence and cleave for robust policies that enable there to be said ‘without buzzwords’ in the reality of ‘transparency.’’
This recap captures the incident, its legal outcome, and remaining gaps for clarity, all of which inform GCA Forums News’ concern on justice. Feel free to inform me of other perspectives, like public reception or parallel cases.
-
This reply was modified 6 days, 16 hours ago by
-
Can you please give us a comprehensive, detailed overview of professional courtesy among police officers? Is professional courtesy an unwritten code of silence where whenever a police officer, police officer family member, or anyone who drops a police officer’s name gets a get out of jail card (the cop will turn the other way and not give the person stopped a traffic ticket or will not arrest the driver for driving under the influence). I know for a fact that Chicago police officers are big or used to be big on extending professional courtesy among each other as well as members of other police departments in Illinois as well as other states. Is extending professional courtesy a crime? Can you get disciplined, suspended, fired, or arrested for extending professional courtesy? I have been curious about the practice of police officers extending professional courtesy for quite some time. Thank you.
-
Following is a summary of professional courtesy among police officers for viewers and members of GCA Forums News. This response explains the concept and its connection to the “unwritten code of silence,” its occurrence, including that of Chicago policemen, the legal implications, and the possible repercussions such as discipline, suspension, firing, or arrest. The evaluation is based on basic assumptions, practices, contemporary context, and legal vernacular as of March 22, 2025, while avoiding made-up details on evidentially unsustainable claims.
GCA Forums News: Professional Courtesy Among Police Officers: The Blue Shield
What is Professional Courtesy Among Police Officers?
- Professional “courtesy” in law enforcement describes an unofficial practice where police officers show leniency towards fellow officers or their family members, as well as other law enforcement-affiliated people (e.g., those who ‘name-drop’ a cop) during normal encounters, such as traffic stops or petty crimes.
- This could mean letting go of a speeding citation, disregarding a minor traffic infraction, or, more drastically, choosing not to arrest someone for offenses such as drunken driving (DUI).
- It is often framed as a gesture of trust.
- This is because of the shared appreciation and understanding of the unique stresses and dangers of the job – the “we take care of our own” attitude.
- It is not inscribed in official police manuals or laws.
- Still, it is instead an unwritten rule practiced in several police departments.
- This is different, yet mistakenly intertwined, with the “blue code of silence,” which describes the tendency of officers not to disclose unethical behavior of fellow officers.
- While the code of silence usually protects the most serious abuses like brutality and corruption, silence in ‘professional courtesy’ tends to surround less serious infractions bordering on perks associated with police authority rather than criminal behavior.
Is Professional Courtesy a “Get Out of Jail Free Card”?
- The assumption that these guys extend police courtesy to every offense and, therefore, offer a “get out of jail free card” is an overgeneralization.
- Even if not entirely so, in reality, it is with more discretion than systemically absolved:
Traffic Offences:
- An officer might overlook a fellow police officer or their spouse’s ‘forgiveness’ for an infraction like speeding or failing to come to a complete stop at a stop sign, more so when the infraction is trivial and doesn’t pose a serious risk.
- Depending on the situation, claiming “My brother’s a sergeant in x department” has some weight and can be used to shorten the conversation.
DUI Cases:
- The gravity of a DUI offense and its impact on public safety makes extending courtesies to these cases rare and riskier.
- Courtesy is seldom shown.
- That said, a few stories suggest this has occurred.
- Perhaps an officer might take an intoxicated co-worker home instead of arresting and processing them.
- Or they could choose not to do any sobriety tests.
- Family members or people with connections are not likely to receive this courtesy unless they’re directly related to the officer and the officer has a personal incentive to help them.
- There is some history behind this in Chicago.
- Veterans and local lore claim that long ago, a culture among the CPD extended courtesy beyond colleagues.
- Professional courtesy was even extended to officers from other Illinois and out-of-state departments.
- It was common practice to flash a badge or assert some affiliation to CPD as enough of a pass for traffic stops.
- While this is not as readily accepted now due to so much scrutinization and accountability, some loose forms still survive, particularly among older cops or small suburban police forces.
Prevalence and Examples
- The term’ professional courtesy’ is not confined to Chicago or Illinois.
- It exists throughout the United States, albeit with differing degrees of tolerance.
Chicago Context:
- With a considerable force (historically over 12,000 officers) and a powerful union presence (Fraternal Order of Police).
- Professional courtesy was rampant in the CPD in the 20th century.
- Countless accounts from the 1980s and 1990s of officers in less guarded environments letting off their peers for minor infractions, particularly during periods with less dashcam or bodycam oversight.
- Sparse hard data on courtesy-specific incidents makes systematic study difficult due to their informal nature.
- Still, an investigation into CPD misconduct by the Invisible Institute in 2017 suggested such leniency exists.
Illinois and Beyond:
- Professional courtesy is extended to a CPD officer from other smaller departments in Illinois, such as those in Cook or DuPage Counties, as a nod to Chicago’s regional influence.
- On a national scale, most officers, including those from other states, do not have the same bias.
- A 2004 survey conducted by the National Police Foundation found that 70% of officers surveyed admitted some willingness to numb the rules of engagement with fellow officers.
- This includes even including traffic violations.
High-Profile Cases:
- One example is from New Jersey in 2011, where a state trooper was not charged with DUI after crashing his car, supposedly due to courtesy from the responding officers.
- Or LA in the 1990s, where an off-duty LAPD officer was drunk in public.
- But instead of arresting him, he was driven home.
Is Extending Professional Courtesy a Crime?
- In the legal realm, courtesy is within a professional gray area.
- It doesn’t constitute a crime unless some conditions are met.
Not a Crime Per Se:
- Under discretion, law enforcement can dismiss minor traffic infractions, like exceeding the speed limit by 10 mph.
- In most states, including Illinois, law enforcement is not obligated to issue a ticket for every violation they observe.
- VV verbal warnings are acceptable. It is fundamental to the nature of policing, meaning minor courtesies are permissible without legal consequences.
Criminal Threshold:
- When courtesy ignores serious crimes such as Driving under the influence with a blood alcohol concentration far over the limit (for example, 0.25 in the Wysocki case), the charge moves to misconduct or obstruction of justice.
- Illinois law under 720 ILCS 5/31-1 defines obstructing justice as willfully interfering with an investigation.
- It would apply if an officer covering a fellow officer’s back lies in a report or does not give a breathalyzer because the officer does not want to implicate a friend.
- For lesser felonies or greater endangerment, the offense could escalate to **unofficial misconduct** (720 ILCS 5/33-3), a Class 3 felony, meaning a 2 to 5-year prison term.
Practical Risk:
- Officers have a range of defenses.
- They may claim discretion or “lack of probable cause” to justify criminal intent.
- Thus, charges of professional courtesy crimes are extraordinarily uncommon unless there is gross misconduct, such as bribery or tampering with evidence.
Disciplinary Actions: Suspension, Dismissal, or Charges?
- Prosecution is rare, but a courtesy may invite internal disciplinary measures, especially in modern accountability frameworks.
Discipline:
- Internal handles most… even CPD has policies against exercising favoritism or exercising undue control.
- The Rules and Regulations (for example, Rule 2: “Any conduct prejudicial to the efficiency of the Department”) might do in an officer’s head for the courtesy extended on grantable terms.
- How about a drunk officer driving away from work unattended?
- Repercussions range from reprimands to short (1-30 days) suspensions, more or less, based on how serious the offense is and how well it is documented.
Suspension:
- For cover-up DUIs, especially those that have not gone viral on bodycams or yelled by bystanders, longer suspension (30+) is possible.
- There is COPA in Chicago that investigates misconduct allegations.
- When findings are sustained, they can lead to suspension recommendations.
- Over 3,000 complaints were worked on by COPA in 2022.
- Though courtesy data isn’t isolated, many, if not most, are likely tied to favoritism.
Firing:
- Termination of courtesy is rather difficult.
- Only in the case of utmost enablement dance does obedience to required outside boundaries occur, like a courtesy pulled for someone who gets into a fatal crash.
- These are the kinds of things the Chicago Police Board—custodians of the major… some would say ridiculous cases—have fired officers in the middle of by courtesy already granted attending unmarked leave.
- There are 81 decertifications between 2001-2021, per the Pulitzer Center.
- Still, courtesy is unlikely to be brought this far without justified reasoning unless it is routine or serious compliance.
Arrest:
- An officer could be arrested if courtesy turns into provable crimes, such as bribery, in exchange for ignoring a DUI or record tampering.
- Still, much like in other jurisdictions, the “blue wall” seems to protect these behaviors from prosecution unless they are perpetrated by whistleblowers or supported by irrefutable evidence, such as video footage.
Chicago in Context and Today’s Focus
- Following the 2014 reforms, including the killing of Laquan McDonald and the use of body cameras in 2017, Chicago’s history of professional courtesy has significantly diminished.
- CPD’s consent decree with the Illinois Attorney General entered in 2019 increased controllable courtesy and courtesy without clear justification, increasing the risk of overt courtesy.
- Nonetheless, stubborn cultural lag remains—older officers may continue to perceive courtesy as an entitlement.
- In comparison, newer officers have been trained under closer supervision and are more cautious.
- Illinois suburbs and other states such as New York and California exhibit similar trends: courtesy survives without oversight.
Social Impact and Ethics
- Some analysts state that professional courtesy erodes trust in law enforcement, claiming, “What message is sent to the public when a police officer’s spouse receives preferential treatment for a ticket?”
- It certainly doesn’t help the perception of a dual system of justice, particularly with DUIs where risk to the public is involved.
- Supporters argue that classifying it as a courtesy is more of a morale booster, similar to the complimentary meals awarded to officers at many diners, rather than an offense.
- Reality exists somewhere between these two positions.
- Customary etiquette is a part of people’s behavior, but covering for more serious wrongdoings goes too far.
Final Remarks – Is a Tradition Disappearing?
- Unlike Hollywood’s “code of silence,” professional courtesy is not left unexplained or blanketed.
- It exists within its context, which is socially constructed by the bonds and risks involved in a given situation or relationship.
- It has undergone some changes due to technological advancements and restructuring.
- For now, it persists in the background as part of police culture.
- Still, it does pose hard questions.
- Is this a justified fringe benefit for a thankless duty, or is it a betrayal of sworn duty and an equal application of the law?
- It demonstrates, for the GCA Forums News audience, that professional courtesy, regardless of scale, is dangerous for the integrity of law enforcement officials.
- Too much courtesy and not enough accountability marks the police force and not upholding the promises made.
This summary combines understanding history, considering the law, and reviewing the culture. Ask for more detailed analyses of particular cases, Chicago’s reform attempts, or comparisons to other states.
-
Police officers are not above the law and in this day and age with body and dash cameras everywhere around you and audio recordings, how can an professional Police officer try bribing the Police Officer charging him with driving under the influence.
Things start to get personal around 33:43.
From the report of Hall County Sheriff’s Deputy J.W. Thompson, edited for clarity and brevity: On November 10, 2018 at approximately 1:20 am I was enforcing the speed limit on I-985 N near Friendship Road when I observed a maroon 1995 Dodge Ram traveling at high rate of speed. I visually estimated the vehicle’s speed to be 90 MPH and LIDAR confirmed its speed at the same. I activated the emergency equipment on my marked patrol vehicle and accelerated to catch up to the vehicle. When I caught up to the Dodge, it braked abruptly and pulled over into the right shoulder.
I exited my patrol vehicle and approached the driver’s side window of the Dodge. I asked the driver, identified as Adam Davis for his driver’s license, which he provided. I recognized Davis because he is a City of Gainesville Police Officer. Davis stated, “I got my backup weapon on me” and asked my name. When asked what he had to drink, Davis stated “Not a damn thing.” I asked Davis “Not a thing at all?” and he replied “No sir.” I could smell an odor of alcoholic beverages emanating from Adam Davis’ breath, which he explained with “My wife’s been drinking, man.”
While performing the HGN evaluation, Davis began loudly yelling my name. I informed Davis that he was beginning to be belligerent, and he lowered his voice and spoke to me in a normal tone. I again gave Davis the instructions for the HGN test. I observed horizontal gaze nystagmus in both left and right eye while checking for lack of smooth pursuit.
I inventoried Davis’ vehicle prior to impound. Terry’s Towing removed the vehicle from the scene. While en route the jail. Davis expressed that he would like to submit to the state administered chemical test.
[Omitted from Thompson’s report: any mention of the many other things Davis alleged.]
Upon arriving to the jail, I read Davis the implied consent notice again. He agreed to submit to the state administered chemical test of his blood. Davis also stated that he would like his own independent chemical test. Once we entered the jail, Davis repeatedly stated that he would submit to the state’s chemical test if he was required to, but he was not doing it freely and voluntarily. Davis advised that he wanted to comply with state law if he was required to submit to a test. While sitting in the chair where blood draws are conducted, Davis continued to state that he would allow the nurse to draw his blood, but he was not doing so freely and voluntarily. After conferring with the nurse, Sgt. Smith and others, we felt that Davis’ willingness to submit to the chemical test of his blood was not voluntary due to his contradictory statements.
I again read Davis the implied consent notice and this time asked for chemical test of his breath. He agreed to submit, but again advised that submitting to the state because the law requires him to, but not freely and voluntarily. I advised Adam Davis that it was up to him to provide a sample into the instrument; Davis advised that he had to breathe out to live. Davis eventually provided a sufficient sample into the Intoxilyzer 9000, which returned a BAC of .144%, confirming the earlier PBT reading of .142%.
Davis was charged with speeding and DUI.
He resigned the next Saturday.
In a 2013 Gainesville Police annual report, Davis is noted as having received an award from Mothers Against Drunk Driving for making 25 DUI arrests that year. Davis pleaded no contest to a reduced charge of reckless driving and was sentenced to 12 months probation.