Two city cops have been suspended with pay pending further investigation for moonlighting as bouncers at a bar that served underage college students against department policy. What should be done?
- Fire them (58%, 125 Votes)
- Suspend them without pay for a lengthy period (42%, 89 Votes)
Total Voters: 214
Loading ...0
Don’t you think we should get all the facts first?
What more do you need?
How about facts, Andy?
What is the actual language in the regs?
How prevalent is this practice?
What are their histories of both exemplary performance and disciplinary histories?
How far up the ladder does this practice go and who was aware of this?
Is that asking too much?
Bob, just because you have a good record does not mean you get a free pass when you break the law, the prevalence of this practice cannot be applied to these two because there are no witnesses. There is more here than meets the eye. Why do this duty until 2am or whenever bars close when you can make the same money working days looking in a hole and be home at night, I wonder???
Sure we should, Bob. The police union is going to regret giving the chief the power to fire and these two officers will probably be the first casualties of that decision.
Good thing the Police have a “Civil Service” system to keep the administration from unfair practices! “NOT!”
Donald Day–yes, indeed you are correct. I believe giving that power to the Chief could possibly result in a perversion of power, especially if and when it ever gets personal. I’m not implying that is the case here, but the possibility exists. As far as the two officers, they are entitled to due process in spite of the fact they perhaps should have used better judgement.
Just a question. I was not aware power was given to the Chief by the Police Union. What do the rank-and-file officers think of that? Did they actually vote to approve it?
The union voted in favor of it.
SOMEONE has to have the final authority in disciplining or firing police officers. Would it not make sense that such authority lies within the responsibilities of the Chief of Police? I am absolutely sure there is a process involved and it is NOT a blank-check authority. We live in a highly litigious society and any disciplinary action, especially termination, would need substantial legal support. In this specific case, police regulations concerning moonlighting are quite clear. There is no gray area here. These officers broke dept rules. But what are the implications? What message does ACTING Chief AJ Perez want to send out to the existing police officers? Rules can be broken? To those who will be selecting the next permanent Police Chief, will Chief Perez say he is allowing rules to be broken that can very well possibly lead to a compromised police force? The job of a police officer, especially in an urban area such as Bridgeport, must be stressful both physically and mentally. Police officers need to be 100% alert and not compromised in any way in the performance of their job. Will chief Perez allow compromised police officers to “try” to perform their main job but risk the safety of the people of Bridgeport because they are compromised physically and mentally? How did the police officers who conducted this raid find 85 underage students and yet these two allowed students to enter this bar? In a bigger picture, how will the Bridgeport Police Dept and the City of Bridgeport deal with the some of the problems up in the North End due to the rapid expansion of Sacred Heart University?
They will do nothing in the North End. The city is too busy trying to please Sacred Heart and why I don’t know. People have been complaining for years and getting lip service for their troubles. It will take a tragedy before anything meaningful is done.
I see where the council people want to pass a few ordinances but these are feel-good laws that mean nothing. There are laws on the books that cover what the council people want to pass, here is an example of a feel-good law, it’s called a curfew, one person in three years has been brought in under this ordinance.
The Charter included The Police Board in the disciplinary process to provide a check on the Police Chief and to make sure there was oversight of the process, especially when civilian complaints were involved.
First off, there are safety nets for officers fired by the chief. The union knows it and the cops know it but the citizens don’t know it. A cop fired by the chief can still go through the grievance steps and can appeal to the state labor board and all else failing can go to court. So let’s not have a pity party for people who may get fired.
And we have to remember a rape was committed several days before the BPD raid and there is an investigation going on whether these two moonlighters were present that night. Statements have already been made and reported that these two officers were seen previously acting as bouncers at this bar. Whenever we see this type of activity (large amount of young people, inebriated to some degree, event occurring late at night), you can bet this activity would be a magnet to drug dealers. The demand is there, someone will provide the supply.
Police working at bars, privately, has been a regular practice in all sections of the City, for as many years as I can remember. Over 30, easily.
Sacred Heart is a liability to Bridgeport and must be treated as such until such time as they begin the execution of an appropriate, sincere plan to redeem their institution’s relationship with Bridgeport and its neighborhoods. (I have dealt with them for many years as the coordinator of the Lake Forest block watch.)
To reiterate:
Jeff Kohut // Apr 8, 2016 at 1:31 pm
The city needs a few more ordinances to address the public safety and neighborhood quality-of-life issues related to SHU-student/SHU-institutional abuse of Bridgeport. Violations of the ordinances should be designed to punish SHU, student violators, and absentee landlord violators heavily, while enhancing Bridgeport’s public-safety and zoning-enforcement capacity.
Talking with Larry Wielk/SHU, who has presided over the SHU student rampage for many years, and expecting a different result, doesn’t show great intelligence. The fact Larry Wielk is still at SHU in the same capacity only reinforces the obvious observation of SHU having no regard for Bridgeport and no intention to curb its students.
Besides the new ordinances, the city should be exploring the option of lawsuits against SHU on behalf of the city at large and the neighborhoods of the city.
SHU is one of Bridgeport’s biggest problems and, historically, the city has done nothing but accommodate their every overture while pretending to “get tough” with them on behalf of our beleaguered neighborhoods.
I don’t understand why without a scintilla of evidence people are demanding these officers’ careers. They supposedly broke the rules by working as bouncers, but there is no evidence they knew there was underage drinking or could have stopped a rape committed near this bar. When does the crime warrant a swift kick in the ass rather than the death of a career?
Well, they were there to check those entering the bar. They were also there to keep an eye on the patrons and I am sure they were there to watch the age of the patrons. It’s not my responsibility to see the cops don’t screw up their careers. It’s their job.
The police department has been hiding a lot of dirt and it’s time they clean up and move forward! A former Bridgeport cop who retired on disability is now working for another large Connecticut Department as a full-time officer. In fact he was involved in a righteous shooting. How does this happen and the taxpayers are paying for his bogus pension?
A Bpt Police Sgt. is involved in an insurance fraud case involving another officer. There are a lot of lies and fraud here. This Sgt gets busted to patrolman and is still on the job.
Speaking of Sacred Heart, I’ll share what I personally witnessed last night on Old Town Road between Park and Madison Aves. I was headed to the mall around 7:45-8:00pm and there was literally a swarm of at least 75 kids all over the street, several of whom were obviously underage (in my opinion) and visibly intoxicated. There were 6 or 7 Bridgeport patrol cars reeling these kids in attempting to break up this large gathering and restore law and order. What quality of life is this for the residents of that neighborhood? There were so many cars parked on both sides of Old Town Road, the street was barely able to accommodate two-way traffic. Where was SHU security and what type of discipline will be imposed on these students by the university? Probably none if I had to guess. Wielk himself should have been called to the scene and played a hand in dispersing these students. The root of the problem is the landlords who rent to the students knowing full well they have no respect for the residents of the neighborhood, not to mention allowing too many of them to live in the house. Bridgeport gets saddled with the task of having their police break up massive gatherings of this sort at the expense of Bridgeport’s taxpayers. SHU should be made financially liable for the time the police spend breaking up raucous gatherings such as the one I witnessed. Mr. Wielk is an enabler; he is not part of the solution, rather part of the problem. The Dean has a responsibility to inform the parents of these students of their behavior and pay for damages to peoples’ property. Ultimately, the students should be suspended. Enough of these nonproductive and worthless meetings with Bridgeport’s elected officials and SHU administration, the residents of the neighborhoods affected by this should form a group and demand an audience with SHU administration and insist that something be done to put an end to the destruction of their homes and quality of life. As far as local bars serving under-aged kids both in Bridgeport and Fairfield, why am I not surprised? Their money is green and it’s all about the money. They don’t care what happens when drunk kids get behind the wheel putting not only their lives in danger, but the lives of innocent victims as well. Revoke their licenses and fine them heavily until they agree to abide by State liquor regulations.
Bravo, well said.
No Righteous Condemnation here, Lord.
Excellent post, Godiva!
Police should be setting an example and not contributing to the delinquency of minors!!! Why were they not carding patrons??? Why did they turn a blind eye to what was going on? No point in having laws when no one seems to be willing to enforce them; not even the President of the United States!!!