Plan B Forum

We wonder why cops shoot first and ask questions later, when not only are they rarely fired when they murder innocent civilians, but they also can be fired for being insufficiently bloodthirsty to satisfy their superiors' own lust to pile up corpses like cordwood.

I think I am taking West Virginia off my list of "nice places to visit."

snailgate

Most cops arevno different...regardless of state.

Jarlaxle wrote:Most cops arevno different...regardless of state.

But in West Virginia they are all cousins.


yrs,
rubato

Hyperbole, much?

Interesting how you all blew right through the fact that as a probationary office, he can be fired like anyone -- for cause, or no cause. Also completely ignored is the fact that there are two other "incidents" recorded concerning his job performance. During his probationary period ------ probably less than six months of service as a sworn office.

But no, lets just make huge assumptions that contradict what the Chief of Police (who presumably has the discretion and hire and fire offices, and who knows a lot more about law enforcement than anyone here) had to say about the termination.

The imaginary crying about a lack of pension is also hysterical. He's not entitled to a pension until he serves some period of time defined by years of service and age. Who expects a pension after (presumably) six months of work or less? In the private sector, employees often aren't eligible to contribute even their own monies into a 401K plan or something similar until they have a year of service under their belts.

Yes he was probationary. Yes there were two previous incidents, one of which also involved the two officers who arrived on the scene in this incident, and which sounds completely bogus (the death of an apparent stroke victim, in which no one has subsequently been charged, was not reported as "suspicious"). Strange how the three page letter recommending his termination makes no mention of these other incidents and says:

It is the opinion of this officer that Ptlm. Mader should be dismissed from employment by the City of Weirton Police Department before the close of hisprobationary period due to negligence on his part during the incident that occurred on May 6, 2016, in which a fellow officer had to react and unfortunately take the life of the suspect, Ronald. D. Williams, to ensure the safety of the victim and her young son at 119 Marie Avenue, Weirton, West Virginia, Hancock County, as well as other officers on scene and other citizens residing within the immediate area.

Strange also how Mader was terminated on June 6, but that the chief gave a press conference on June 8 and said that all three officers were back at work.

So yes, I have every reason to discount the trumped up reasons cited by the chief of police for the firing because he was caught blatantly lying about the sequence of events.

It is obvious what happened here. William's unloaded gun was proof that Mader's assessment of the situation was absolutely correct, and so he had to be brought into disrepute and fired in order to save the asses of the two cops who summarily executed a suicidal victim.

My only concern is the statement that he put the victim and her young son at risk by not firing (presumably when he had an open shot). He made a judgment that appears to be correct, but imagine what we might be saying if the guy with the gun shot the woman and kid because he didn't react. After all, he was a relatively new officer on the scene, and the other, more experienced, officers presumably did not agree with his assessment. At some point any member of a team must yield to those in command and act accordingly no matter what his opinion is. Not that I'd like to see this guy killed, but if he was threatening a woman and child with a gun (who no one, even the officer in question, knew was unloaded), their first duty is to protect them.

Ever hear of something called "the continuum of force" with regard to encounters with a suspect?  It's a little too long and complicated to go into full detail here, but basically it says that coming onto the scene, guns blazing, shooting up everything in sight, reloading and shooting some more, and then start asking "What's going on?" is your LAST option.

-"BB"-

Scoot, your own link says the other incidents were discussed in the termination letter, albeit briefly.

As for notice that he was being considered for termination, not typically required for a probie.

I'd like to see the termination letter itself. If he was ordered to fire and did not, that is insubordination and possibly conduct unbecoming. Offenses which could result in severe disciple to an established officer, and grounds for immediate termination for a probie.

Indeed it is the last option Bill, but I see nothing in the post to say that is what happened here.

Guinevere wrote:I'd like to see the termination letter itself.

All of the documents relating to the termination are in the link I provided, beginning with the recommendation for termination from Mader's captain, the concurrence in the recommendation by the chief, and the termination letter sent by the city manager.

I don't see them, I only see the articles, no links to original source documents.

If you go here and scroll down a bit, you will come to a document window that has all of the letters related to his termination.

Big RR, I read the story when it first appeared in the Washington Post. There were no other persons threatened with harm, particularly not the girlfriend or any children beyond collateral damage watching a suicide. The woman called 911, asking for help for her boyfriend who was threatening to kill--threatening too kill no one but himself.

The first responding officer on the scene judged there was no deadly threat. The 'backup" cops judged otherwise. Events establish the first cop was right, the others were wrong. This is a small town (less than 20K population) New cop has not had time to develop informal social connections within the job or the community. His demonstrated superior judgement is an embarrassment to everyone else. Clearly he has to go. Weirton W. Va is a very small town. Probably could get along much better as a cop in Morgantown which is in the same county but a bit bigger and a college town.

snailgate

Scooter wrote:

Guinevere wrote:I'd like to see the termination letter itself.

All of the documents relating to the termination are in the link I provided, beginning with the recommendation for termination from Mader's captain, the concurrence in the recommendation by the chief, and the termination letter sent by the city manager.

Got them, thanks. Doesn't change my analysis at all. The standard for "conduct unbecoming" is pretty broad and if the actions involve poor judgment by the officer, that officer is often toast. Conduct unbecoming is charge used to sanction officers for behavior that violates a department's policies and expectations, and requires some level of subjectivity. The Chief of the Department and other Superior Officers are usually those best able to judge that conduct.

It's the police culture's Pavlovian response to "shoot first... ask questions later" that must change. I don't expect any level of critical thinking from law enforcement anytime soon. Let's face it -- change is hard.

Guinevere wrote:The standard for "conduct unbecoming" is pretty broad and if the actions involve poor judgment by the officer, that officer is often toast.

You're saying legally they had the right to fire him and that isn't in dispute at all. I'm talking about their motivations for doing so and of an agenda that is clearly at work when there are so many discrepancies in the way the entire incident was handled and how they reported on it.

Burning Petard wrote:Big RR, I read the story when it first appeared in the Washington Post. There were no other persons threatened with harm, particularly not the girlfriend or any children beyond collateral damage watching a suicide. The woman called 911, asking for help for her boyfriend who was threatening to kill--threatening too kill no one but himself.

The first responding officer on the scene judged there was no deadly threat. The 'backup" cops judged otherwise. Events establish the first cop was right, the others were wrong. This is a small town (less than 20K population) New cop has not had time to develop informal social connections within the job or the community. His demonstrated superior judgement is an embarrassment to everyone else. Clearly he has to go. Weirton W. Va is a very small town. Probably could get along much better as a cop in Morgantown which is in the same county but a bit bigger and a college town.

snailgate

true, but then a suicide might well turn into a murder suicide at a moment's notice, and while the guy appeared to be right this time, imagine what people might be yelling if the guy with the gun turned that gun on the woman and kid--an unstable guy with a gun is liable to do anything. So it's a comparison between the judgment of two experienced officers vs that of a newbie who (at least as the letter stated) exhibited poor judgment in the past when arriving at a crime scene. Maybe the rules should be changed so that the police should hold off from shooting more, but I do think that the judgment of two experienced officers has to outweigh that of a new guy fresh from the academy. Indeed, I would bet in most departments, big or small, actions like this would result in firings or serious discipline; real police work is not like TV where the brash young guy is always right.

Scooter--I agree the handling and reporting of the incident can be and should have been much better. Personally, I think this guy did a good thing and saved a life, but he took a big chance and risked other lives in doing so, and just because he was right this time does not mean he should get a pass.

Everybody, not just cops, should assume a firearm is loaded whether they or someone else is holding it - and especially when some nut job is carrying one. The probationary cop was wrong, not because he didn't kill the suspect but because he didn't follow orders and proper police procedure. Apparently, it's not the first time he's done that so he was fired for it.

If the media had reported the event like this: Today a suicidal man with a gun was shot dead, it wouldn't have gotten enough attention. Throwing in the fact that a cop was fired for disobeying orders gets a lot more people riled up and complaining about cops - which is the motive for the article.

Cops bad.

Suspects acting out with guns are just having a bad day and need coddling.