News of the day: Dormont manager charged with trespass in borough building (Pittsburgh: live, law)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
News of the day: Dormont manager charged with trespass in borough building
OK, I know that cops aren't the smartest people in the world but they must have scrapped the bottom of the barrel when they hired the ones in Dormont. Giving your boss a ticket for entering a building that he pretty much has direct control over isn't the smartest idea in the world. If I was the township manager this cop would be out looking for a new job tomorrow.
When I lived in Dormont, my roommate got a $110 ticket for going the wrong way through a parking lot at 11 pm (it was empty). Honest mistake...worth $110?..hardly.
And now either the same guy or one of his cronies charged the borough manager with criminal trespassing in the borough building...maybe they'll finally get held responsible this time. To protect and serve...yeah, right.
Civil service commission and/or union contract rules might prevent the immediate firing of this police officer.
But this kind of thing is just ridiculous, makes me wonder if Dormont borough might not need as many police officers as are currently budgeted if the cops are worried about this.
Clearly there have been ongoing problems in Dormont.
A township manager doesn't have the right to go anywhere he wants in the township's police department. He is not a police officer.
The police have a legitimate complaint about him walking around where there are confidential papers and arrested juveniles.
The township manager doesn't have a right to see juveniles who are arrested. Identities of juveniles are protected by law.
Let's put this into perspective, the Mayor of Pittsburgh can't go strolling into a Pittsburgh police department and walk into any area of the building he wishes.
I haven't studied Dormont's charter or bylaws, and so I don't claim to fully understand the structure of its municipal government. I'm assuming the manager is the executive head of the municipality and therefore the official to whom the police department ultimately answer.
If this assumption is correct, then it seems to me simply preposterous to say this official may not enter the offices of the police as he chooses. To contend otherwise is in effect to maintain that the police in Dormont answer to no one.
This is not to say that the position of the police isn't superior in law, which is nowhere more an ass than in PA.
However, on the basis of only what has been reported so far, there is a whiff of insurrection. When the armed servants of the state rebel, no punishment is too severe. If it transpires that these events are the product of a conspiracy by the Dormont police to intimidate the civil magistracy of the municipality, it will be in the interests of the Commonwealth to make an example pour encourager les autres.
I haven't studied Dormont's charter or bylaws, and so I don't claim to fully understand the structure of its municipal government. I'm assuming the manager is the executive head of the municipality and therefore the official to whom the police department ultimately answer.
If this assumption is correct, then it seems to me simply preposterous to say this official may not enter the offices of the police as he chooses. To contend otherwise is in effect to maintain that the police in Dormont answer to no one.
This is not to say that the position of the police isn't superior in law, which is nowhere more an ass than in PA.
However, on the basis of only what has been reported so far, there is a whiff of insurrection. When the armed servants of the state rebel, no punishment is too severe. If it transpires that these events are the product of a conspiracy by the Dormont police to intimidate the civil magistracy of the municipality, it will be in the interests of the Commonwealth to make an example pour encourager les autres.
This is my take on it as well. The police do answer to the township manager and council. While I understand the chief's complaint that some areas are suppose to be secure, actually charging the boss with trespassing seemed way out of line. Too many of these local cops think they're gods and above the law. Look at the crap that was going on in Hanover township recently. The chief of police and the county DA wanted a couple of the cops fired for criminal activity, a local judge overruled them and reinstated the cops.
While I understand the chief's complaint that some areas are suppose to be secure, actually charging the boss with trespassing seemed way out of line.
What do you expect the Chief to do when the manager continued to do it after being told and warned repeatedly. Sounds to me like the manager was throwing his clout around, needing to be put in his place. The very fact he parks illegally and expects to not get a ticket is another indication he thinks he's above the law too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velvet Jones
Too many of these local cops think they're gods and above the law.
But there are also politicians and other government officials who think they're above the law, who repeatedly try to interfere with the police department. It's a fine line---being in a charge of an entity but being hands off too.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not a cop lover. Far from it. I think most of them are bullies on power trips. But the fact that this manager repeatedly ignored warnings to not enter secure areas of the police department tells me that this manager is on a power trip too.
Most importantly, I doubt the manager is in charge of the police department. There is a Mayor of Dormont. The mayor is in charge of the police department. The police chief is hired to run the police department and the township manager is hired to run the township. The township manager is NOT higher than the police chief. Both are hired by elected officials to run the separate entities.
Furthermore, like squarian, I'll admit I don't know the actual structure for this municipality. More information is needed to be certain.
Most importantly, I doubt the manager is in charge of the police department. There is a Mayor of Dormont. The mayor is in charge of the police department. The police chief is hired to run the police department and the township manager is hired to run the township. The township manager is NOT higher than the police chief. Both are hired by elected officials to run the separate entities.
This is what is not clear. In the article is states the chief was recently demoted and implies the borough manager was the responsible. That is why I took it that he was in charge. In PA there are so many different types of local government it is impossible to keep track of anything. Also, the borough is most certainly responsible for the police. While the police are suppose to operate independently, they ultimately answer to the council and/or the mayor. As has happened around here recently, police departments have been eliminated with the stroke of a pen in more than one borough.
Location: About 10 miles north of Pittsburgh International
1,765 posts, read 1,299,980 times
Reputation: 1156
Quote:
The mayor is in charge of the police department.
I believe Hopes is correct. The Police department answers to the Mayor, not to the Manager.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
