
Sheriff Fires Cop Who Threatened to Arrest Me for Taking Photos of Cops - r0h1n
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2014/02/03/sheriff-fires-cop-who-threatened-to-arrest-me-for-taking-photos-of-cops
======
netcan
_" Your ill-advised actions also play to some of the most basic fears among
some citizens, which is that a police officer may indiscriminately exercise
his or her power in violation of their rights," Urquharts discipline letter
continues. He explains people fear that "in the event of a complaint, the
officer will just deny the allegations and 'circle the wagons' with his or her
fellow officers with the expectation they will take care of their own. In a
matter of minutes, your actions violated the trust that we, as a department,
spend years trying to build and maintain."_

Heartening.

~~~
gizmo
Heartening? I wish:

> Saulet has long history of misconduct, with approximately 120 allegations
> against him and 21 cases of sustained misconduct (more than any other
> officer in the department).

It isn't exactly progress if the worst officer in de the department is fired
after sustained abusive behavior. And the union immediately attempted to
overturn the dismissal as well. This is pretty much as bad as it gets.

So I see no reason for optimism, given the circumstances. There are no signs
of structural improvement. Not so heartening.

~~~
ChrisBland
I am not a fan of public unions either, but this is a cheap shot at them and
it hurts the ability to have a discussion about unions. Unions have what is
called 'duty of fair representation' \- which requires them to defend their
members. If the union failed to defend him here he could sue the union
claiming it has failed to fulfill its statutory duty to represent the employee
in that dispute. If they got to pick which cases to defend, the whole point of
having union reps/arbitration/mediation would go out the window.

More reading:
[http://www.flra.gov/Guidance_duty%20of%20fair%20representati...](http://www.flra.gov/Guidance_duty%20of%20fair%20representation)

~~~
ItendToDisagree
Do they have to defend someone who is outside of the union's stated
rules/expectations for a member? For instance if the Officer's Union stated
that if a member was doing something illegal or grossly incompetent that they
would not defend the actions? Not saying that this union does have that sort
of stipulation, but curious as to where the line is drawn.

It does seem that the officer had a history of 'bad behavior' and was quite
obviously in the wrong here. Do they have to defend 'hopeless cases' is really
the question I have.

I would be much happier if the union stood back, and decided to let him try to
bring suit, then shut him down in court for his own behavior... Rather than
just trying to get someone who obviously has issues reinstated because
"reasons".

~~~
ggchappell
I doubt there is any sort of line.

Consider that someone accused of a crime gets to be represented in court, no
matter how bad the accusation is (in the U.S.). The reasoning behind this is
(1) they _might_ not be guilty of the crime, and until the court decides they
are, they should be treated as if they are not; (2) they need someone to
ensure they are treated fairly.

I think similar reasoning can be applied here. Thus it would not be
unreasonable that a union _always_ defends a member who is
accused/disciplined/fired.

~~~
jlgaddis
My mother is (and has been for many years) an officer of the union at her
workplace.

I know of many cases where employees were accused of either committing crimes
or extreme violations of the "workplace rules" and the Union would not
represent them before the company. These instances are the exceptions, of
course, and the Union does represent the employee the overwhelming majority of
the time -- and are, more often than not, successful in at least saving the
employee's job.

This is not a Police Union, of course, so things may very well be different.
It is my understanding that the officers in a Police Union are almost always
current or former police officers and I would guess that they would represent
an officer accused of wrongdoing in all but perhaps the most extreme cases
(and, in those cases, it's probably mostly due to P.R.).

In my opinion, an officer accused of wrongdoing is entitled to due process
just like anyone else. It does upset me, however, that Police Unions will
often do anything they can to save an officer's job regardless of what s/he
has done and/or the seriousness of the violation. I realize that that is what
they are _supposed_ to do but it ends up reflecting badly on the police
department when Officer Smith was found to have done ${whatever} and escapes
with little or no consequences.

------
VexXtreme
Is this possible? Initially I thought this was an Onion article. If this
really is true, that's wonderful news. One small step toward reinstating civil
liberties.

Now how about someone deals with cops who illegally force doctors to do enemas
and anal cavity searches on people for having strange posture, or do roadside
vaginal cavity searches on women with no probable cause, or shoot people's
dogs upon erroneously entering their homes, or shoot unarmed suspects standing
still with hands in the air?

Also, I find it incredible that the people who swore to serve the citizens and
protect the constitution of their country are so quick to completely
disrespect the said constitution so often.

~~~
a3n
> Also, I find it incredible that the people who swore to serve the citizens
> and protect the constitution of their country are so quick to completely
> disrespect the said constitution so often.

I think for a lot of people swearing an oath is just something you have to say
before they give you a gun and money.

~~~
antjanus
It's the same with taking the [Hippocratic
Oath]([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath))
for doctors before they get the cash rolling in for them.

~~~
ItendToDisagree
Would seem that way for the 'enhanced interrogation' doctors at the very
least.

------
chilldream
Further coverage:

[http://photographyisnotacrime.com/?s=dominic+holden](http://photographyisnotacrime.com/?s=dominic+holden)

I'm posting that link mostly for the name of the blog, to demonstrate that
this kind of incident is common enough in the US to have its own blog.
Personally I'm hoping this becomes moot when police officers are required to
wear their own cameras while on duty.

~~~
jlgaddis
I recall stumbling across that blog a while back and reading some of the
stories -- some of which were frightening.

With almost all police cars now equipped with video cameras and officers
wearing body microphones, I find it odd that they can be turned on and off by
the officer. Although the camera and body mic are (usually, AIUI) activated
automatically when the lights/sirens are engaged, I would love for the camera
and microphone to be always-on.

------
teddyuk
It is great that in this case the policeman was sacked but I get the
impression it was because he lied afterwards.

Police in the UK and US continually treat citizens as beneath them and with
contempt - he should have been sacked because he was rude and wrong, not
because he lied.

~~~
polymatter
There was substantially more than just mere lying. From TFA:

"Saulet has long history of misconduct, with approximately 120 allegations
against him and 21 cases of sustained misconduct (more than any other officer
in the department). The sheriff's letter says that Saulet repeatedly was told
to improve interactions with the public, and provided with remarkable
investments of coaching and counseling. Saulet underwent three performance-
improvement plans, two training sessions, and two multi-visit sessions with a
social psychologist, coaching sessions with supervisors, and 80 hours of time
off without pay. Saulet was demoted from sergeant to deputy for another
incident in August"

In that incident "Saulet accosted a family that made a wrong turn into a Metro
transit station last December [due to following their GPS]. Saulet reportedly
threatened to arrest the parents in the car—including a visibly pregnant
woman—and then suggested the couple's 18-month-old daughter would be seized by
government authorities"[1].

Its also worth noting that the reporter filed a complaint against a 2nd
officer who was also found guilty, but that officer was just given a day off
without pay.

So the conclusion seems to be this was a problem officer who had been given
many opportunities to improve and this was merely the last straw on the camels
back.

[1] [http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/08/19/king-
co...](http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/08/19/king-county-
sheriff-demotes-problem-cop)

~~~
marvin
It's a shrewd political move by the sheriff to fire the officer for this
particular offense. It sends a signal to the other officers while remaining
completely safe from any legitimate internal criticism or controversy. If you
were a leader in the police who wanted to set the record straight on the
legalities of filming police officers, this would be the way to do it.

------
joesmo
You might not be glad he got fired, but rest assured there are many of us who
are. This type of thing happens constantly on every police force in America
(and pretty much everywhere) and is oftentimes a lot worse.

It's a small win, but someone like this _deserves_ to be made an example out
of. I doubt it will change anything, even in Seattle, but at least there's one
less police officer arresting people and ruining their lives (arrest records
are permanent; they cannot be expunged ever).

I personally can relate, having been threatened (along with about a dozen or
more other people) by a police officer with death by SUV if I did not leave
the public sidewalk. Yes, the officer started rolling into the crowd.

------
ck2
If they had 120 allegations, imagine how many never got filed.

Go to the front desk at a police station and try to file a complaint, just
make sure you have bail money on hand.

~~~
umsm
Is this true? Will you really be arrested for filing a complaint at a police
station?

~~~
ck2
Someone went to like a dozen stations and tried to ask for a complaint form
and recorded what happened. Has to be on youtube somewhere.

You won't be arrested specifically for the complaint of course, they are going
to find something else, follow you, etc.

------
bart42_0
In Spain they don't threaten to arrest you for taking photos of cops, they
arrest you immediately without any warning.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
But is it actually against Spanish law?

If an officer arrests you for breaking a bad law, that's not on the officer,
that's on the legislators.

The UK it's a grey area. In theory it's fine unless the officer has reason to
believe that the photos will be used to aid in an act of terrorism but that
wiggle room could potentially be enough for an officer wishing to abuse their
power.

Interestingly the Met actually have a page on photographers rights in this
(and other) regards:
[http://content.met.police.uk/Site/photographyadvice](http://content.met.police.uk/Site/photographyadvice)

~~~
dandelany
> But is it actually against Spanish law?

Not yet. [http://rt.com/op-edge/spain-law-protest-
violence-621/](http://rt.com/op-edge/spain-law-protest-violence-621/)

------
kordless
> thereafter, rather than be accountable, you attempted to recast events in a
> light more favorable to you

Rationalizations suck when you're in cognitive dissonance mode.

------
leobelle
> Saulet underwent three performance-improvement plans, two training sessions,
> and two multi-visit sessions with a social psychologist, coaching sessions
> with supervisors, and 80 hours of time off without pay. Saulet was demoted
> from sergeant to deputy for another incident in August.

Like they were probably just waiting for anything to come along to fire this
guy. Amazing he lasted so long.

~~~
MartinCron
Police work attracts both the good and bad elements of society. Saulet appears
to be one of the bad ones. It's a shame it took this long to remove him from
the force.

