100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Question- 6 officers charged in Baltimore | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Seakolony
on
Sat 05/02/15 11:07 AM
|
|
urbanexchange asked >>> If those officers are convicted of murder, what would happen to their pensions? Hmmm, interesting question and as I thought this was unilaterally covered under their Police Union Rules & guidelines --- It's not! SHOCKED ME...but here's something from 2010 in Philadelphia that they were discussing about this very issue and crocked cops >>> PhillyConfidential Should criminal cops lose their pensions? I've fielded a ton of calls and e-mails in the last few days from readers who are angry about city cops who are keeping their pension benefits even after they've been fired from the force or arrested for committing serious crimes. One reader asked today, "Can't you find out if anyone is going to do something about this?" Here's an excerpt of the answer that will appear in tomorrow's Daily News: One after another, stories about bad cops have fallen around the city like dominoes lately, each one more disturbing than the next. There has, however, been one common thread: many of those who have been fired from the force or arrested have had no fear of losing their pension. Some of accused face charges that range from murder to rape to soliciting sex from a minor. As it stands now, the city code doesn't call for a city employee - be it a cop, firefighter or trash collector - to lose his pension, even if he's convicted of one of those crimes. Count City Councilman Frank Rizzo among those who are wondering if the code needs to be changed. "I just began discussing this my staff today," Rizzo said earlier today. "It's something that we're going to look into after the [city] budget is finished," he said. "We'll probably have to hold hearings. ." Rizzo said he was bothered by a recent spate of stories about cops who have retired from the force a day before they were arrested. Many have interpreted the sudden retirements as last ditch attempts on the cops' behalf at saving their pension benefits. Officer Anthony Floyd, a 14-year veteran, retired on Tuesday, and was charged the following day with assaulting and harassing a woman he was dating. Another longtime cop, Tyrone Wiggins, retired a day before he was arrested on rape charges in November. "We can't have cops retiring one day, then getting arrested the next," Rizzo said. Even cops fired for gross misconduct are not blocked from receiving a pension. Also this week, Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey fired Sgt. Robert Ralston after the 21-year veteran admitted that he shot himself last month and created a phony story about being shot by a black man with corn rows. Chapter 22-1300 of the city code states that a city employee could lose retirement benefits only if he or she pleads or is found guilty of perjury; accepting or offering a bribe; engaging in graft or corruption; theft, embezzlement or willful misapplication of city funds; malfeasance in office or engaging in conspiracy to commit any of the above. Former city managing director Phil Goldsmith said that the city code should be amended to include harsh penalties for employees who committed serious felonies. "If someone has violated the public's trust, they should lose their benefits," he said. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/Should_criminal_cops_lose_their_pension_.html#Ir21524F2qRuXWwP.99 So...if some of these 6 think they're more apt to be found copeable then the rest they may opt out for an early retirement and skate under any penalties if this city has the same problem that Philly does! So this means that the local government are trying to defund pensions by convicting them. The only difference in the Baltimore case is that 3 cops are Caucasian: 3 cops are African American. I know at least 2 of them has been on the force since the 90s: at a time when pension contributions were relatively low. I looked up the contract and you only need 5 years in service to be eligible for a pension. They would not be eligible for th 5 years if they are fired though. They would not be eligible for full benefits after five year. i.e. health life, etc and only a portion of salary. They must retire to rceive it not go on suspensiom or be fired. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
urbanexchange asked >>> If those officers are convicted of murder, what would happen to their pensions? Hmmm, interesting question and as I thought this was unilaterally covered under their Police Union Rules & guidelines --- It's not! SHOCKED ME...but here's something from 2010 in Philadelphia that they were discussing about this very issue and crocked cops >>> PhillyConfidential Should criminal cops lose their pensions? I've fielded a ton of calls and e-mails in the last few days from readers who are angry about city cops who are keeping their pension benefits even after they've been fired from the force or arrested for committing serious crimes. One reader asked today, "Can't you find out if anyone is going to do something about this?" Here's an excerpt of the answer that will appear in tomorrow's Daily News: One after another, stories about bad cops have fallen around the city like dominoes lately, each one more disturbing than the next. There has, however, been one common thread: many of those who have been fired from the force or arrested have had no fear of losing their pension. Some of accused face charges that range from murder to rape to soliciting sex from a minor. As it stands now, the city code doesn't call for a city employee - be it a cop, firefighter or trash collector - to lose his pension, even if he's convicted of one of those crimes. Count City Councilman Frank Rizzo among those who are wondering if the code needs to be changed. "I just began discussing this my staff today," Rizzo said earlier today. "It's something that we're going to look into after the [city] budget is finished," he said. "We'll probably have to hold hearings. ." Rizzo said he was bothered by a recent spate of stories about cops who have retired from the force a day before they were arrested. Many have interpreted the sudden retirements as last ditch attempts on the cops' behalf at saving their pension benefits. Officer Anthony Floyd, a 14-year veteran, retired on Tuesday, and was charged the following day with assaulting and harassing a woman he was dating. Another longtime cop, Tyrone Wiggins, retired a day before he was arrested on rape charges in November. "We can't have cops retiring one day, then getting arrested the next," Rizzo said. Even cops fired for gross misconduct are not blocked from receiving a pension. Also this week, Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey fired Sgt. Robert Ralston after the 21-year veteran admitted that he shot himself last month and created a phony story about being shot by a black man with corn rows. Chapter 22-1300 of the city code states that a city employee could lose retirement benefits only if he or she pleads or is found guilty of perjury; accepting or offering a bribe; engaging in graft or corruption; theft, embezzlement or willful misapplication of city funds; malfeasance in office or engaging in conspiracy to commit any of the above. Former city managing director Phil Goldsmith said that the city code should be amended to include harsh penalties for employees who committed serious felonies. "If someone has violated the public's trust, they should lose their benefits," he said. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/Should_criminal_cops_lose_their_pension_.html#Ir21524F2qRuXWwP.99 So...if some of these 6 think they're more apt to be found copeable then the rest they may opt out for an early retirement and skate under any penalties if this city has the same problem that Philly does! So this means that the local government are trying to defund pensions by convicting them. The only difference in the Baltimore case is that 3 cops are Caucasian: 3 cops are African American. I know at least 2 of them has been on the force since the 90s: at a time when pension contributions were relatively low. I looked up the contract and you only need 5 years in service to be eligible for a pension. They would not be eligible for th 5 years if they are fired though. They would not be eligible for full benefits after five year. i.e. health life, etc and only a portion of salary. They must retire to rceive it not go on suspensiom or be fired. I didn't see any list of disqualifications.. The city site has the requirements and benefits listed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
urbanexchange asked >>> If those officers are convicted of murder, what would happen to their pensions? Hmmm, interesting question and as I thought this was unilaterally covered under their Police Union Rules & guidelines --- It's not! SHOCKED ME...but here's something from 2010 in Philadelphia that they were discussing about this very issue and crocked cops >>> PhillyConfidential Should criminal cops lose their pensions? I've fielded a ton of calls and e-mails in the last few days from readers who are angry about city cops who are keeping their pension benefits even after they've been fired from the force or arrested for committing serious crimes. One reader asked today, "Can't you find out if anyone is going to do something about this?" Here's an excerpt of the answer that will appear in tomorrow's Daily News: One after another, stories about bad cops have fallen around the city like dominoes lately, each one more disturbing than the next. There has, however, been one common thread: many of those who have been fired from the force or arrested have had no fear of losing their pension. Some of accused face charges that range from murder to rape to soliciting sex from a minor. As it stands now, the city code doesn't call for a city employee - be it a cop, firefighter or trash collector - to lose his pension, even if he's convicted of one of those crimes. Count City Councilman Frank Rizzo among those who are wondering if the code needs to be changed. "I just began discussing this my staff today," Rizzo said earlier today. "It's something that we're going to look into after the [city] budget is finished," he said. "We'll probably have to hold hearings. ." Rizzo said he was bothered by a recent spate of stories about cops who have retired from the force a day before they were arrested. Many have interpreted the sudden retirements as last ditch attempts on the cops' behalf at saving their pension benefits. Officer Anthony Floyd, a 14-year veteran, retired on Tuesday, and was charged the following day with assaulting and harassing a woman he was dating. Another longtime cop, Tyrone Wiggins, retired a day before he was arrested on rape charges in November. "We can't have cops retiring one day, then getting arrested the next," Rizzo said. Even cops fired for gross misconduct are not blocked from receiving a pension. Also this week, Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey fired Sgt. Robert Ralston after the 21-year veteran admitted that he shot himself last month and created a phony story about being shot by a black man with corn rows. Chapter 22-1300 of the city code states that a city employee could lose retirement benefits only if he or she pleads or is found guilty of perjury; accepting or offering a bribe; engaging in graft or corruption; theft, embezzlement or willful misapplication of city funds; malfeasance in office or engaging in conspiracy to commit any of the above. Former city managing director Phil Goldsmith said that the city code should be amended to include harsh penalties for employees who committed serious felonies. "If someone has violated the public's trust, they should lose their benefits," he said. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/Should_criminal_cops_lose_their_pension_.html#Ir21524F2qRuXWwP.99 So...if some of these 6 think they're more apt to be found copeable then the rest they may opt out for an early retirement and skate under any penalties if this city has the same problem that Philly does! So this means that the local government are trying to defund pensions by convicting them. The only difference in the Baltimore case is that 3 cops are Caucasian: 3 cops are African American. I know at least 2 of them has been on the force since the 90s: at a time when pension contributions were relatively low. I looked up the contract and you only need 5 years in service to be eligible for a pension. They would not be eligible for th 5 years if they are fired though. They would not be eligible for full benefits after five year. i.e. health life, etc and only a portion of salary. They must retire to rceive it not go on suspensiom or be fired. I didn't see any list of disqualifications.. The city site has the requirements and benefits listed. That's right they are city cops not state, my bad. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
urbanexchange asked >>> If those officers are convicted of murder, what would happen to their pensions? Hmmm, interesting question and as I thought this was unilaterally covered under their Police Union Rules & guidelines --- It's not! SHOCKED ME...but here's something from 2010 in Philadelphia that they were discussing about this very issue and crocked cops >>> PhillyConfidential Should criminal cops lose their pensions? I've fielded a ton of calls and e-mails in the last few days from readers who are angry about city cops who are keeping their pension benefits even after they've been fired from the force or arrested for committing serious crimes. One reader asked today, "Can't you find out if anyone is going to do something about this?" Here's an excerpt of the answer that will appear in tomorrow's Daily News: One after another, stories about bad cops have fallen around the city like dominoes lately, each one more disturbing than the next. There has, however, been one common thread: many of those who have been fired from the force or arrested have had no fear of losing their pension. Some of accused face charges that range from murder to rape to soliciting sex from a minor. As it stands now, the city code doesn't call for a city employee - be it a cop, firefighter or trash collector - to lose his pension, even if he's convicted of one of those crimes. Count City Councilman Frank Rizzo among those who are wondering if the code needs to be changed. "I just began discussing this my staff today," Rizzo said earlier today. "It's something that we're going to look into after the [city] budget is finished," he said. "We'll probably have to hold hearings. ." Rizzo said he was bothered by a recent spate of stories about cops who have retired from the force a day before they were arrested. Many have interpreted the sudden retirements as last ditch attempts on the cops' behalf at saving their pension benefits. Officer Anthony Floyd, a 14-year veteran, retired on Tuesday, and was charged the following day with assaulting and harassing a woman he was dating. Another longtime cop, Tyrone Wiggins, retired a day before he was arrested on rape charges in November. "We can't have cops retiring one day, then getting arrested the next," Rizzo said. Even cops fired for gross misconduct are not blocked from receiving a pension. Also this week, Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey fired Sgt. Robert Ralston after the 21-year veteran admitted that he shot himself last month and created a phony story about being shot by a black man with corn rows. Chapter 22-1300 of the city code states that a city employee could lose retirement benefits only if he or she pleads or is found guilty of perjury; accepting or offering a bribe; engaging in graft or corruption; theft, embezzlement or willful misapplication of city funds; malfeasance in office or engaging in conspiracy to commit any of the above. Former city managing director Phil Goldsmith said that the city code should be amended to include harsh penalties for employees who committed serious felonies. "If someone has violated the public's trust, they should lose their benefits," he said. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/Should_criminal_cops_lose_their_pension_.html#Ir21524F2qRuXWwP.99 So...if some of these 6 think they're more apt to be found copeable then the rest they may opt out for an early retirement and skate under any penalties if this city has the same problem that Philly does! So this means that the local government are trying to defund pensions by convicting them. The only difference in the Baltimore case is that 3 cops are Caucasian: 3 cops are African American. I know at least 2 of them has been on the force since the 90s: at a time when pension contributions were relatively low. I looked up the contract and you only need 5 years in service to be eligible for a pension. They would not be eligible for th 5 years if they are fired though. They would not be eligible for full benefits after five year. i.e. health life, etc and only a portion of salary. They must retire to rceive it not go on suspensiom or be fired. I didn't see any list of disqualifications.. The city site has the requirements and benefits listed. That's right they are city cops not state, my bad. now you owe me... haha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
urbanexchange asked >>> If those officers are convicted of murder, what would happen to their pensions? Hmmm, interesting question and as I thought this was unilaterally covered under their Police Union Rules & guidelines --- It's not! SHOCKED ME...but here's something from 2010 in Philadelphia that they were discussing about this very issue and crocked cops >>> PhillyConfidential Should criminal cops lose their pensions? I've fielded a ton of calls and e-mails in the last few days from readers who are angry about city cops who are keeping their pension benefits even after they've been fired from the force or arrested for committing serious crimes. One reader asked today, "Can't you find out if anyone is going to do something about this?" Here's an excerpt of the answer that will appear in tomorrow's Daily News: One after another, stories about bad cops have fallen around the city like dominoes lately, each one more disturbing than the next. There has, however, been one common thread: many of those who have been fired from the force or arrested have had no fear of losing their pension. Some of accused face charges that range from murder to rape to soliciting sex from a minor. As it stands now, the city code doesn't call for a city employee - be it a cop, firefighter or trash collector - to lose his pension, even if he's convicted of one of those crimes. Count City Councilman Frank Rizzo among those who are wondering if the code needs to be changed. "I just began discussing this my staff today," Rizzo said earlier today. "It's something that we're going to look into after the [city] budget is finished," he said. "We'll probably have to hold hearings. ." Rizzo said he was bothered by a recent spate of stories about cops who have retired from the force a day before they were arrested. Many have interpreted the sudden retirements as last ditch attempts on the cops' behalf at saving their pension benefits. Officer Anthony Floyd, a 14-year veteran, retired on Tuesday, and was charged the following day with assaulting and harassing a woman he was dating. Another longtime cop, Tyrone Wiggins, retired a day before he was arrested on rape charges in November. "We can't have cops retiring one day, then getting arrested the next," Rizzo said. Even cops fired for gross misconduct are not blocked from receiving a pension. Also this week, Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey fired Sgt. Robert Ralston after the 21-year veteran admitted that he shot himself last month and created a phony story about being shot by a black man with corn rows. Chapter 22-1300 of the city code states that a city employee could lose retirement benefits only if he or she pleads or is found guilty of perjury; accepting or offering a bribe; engaging in graft or corruption; theft, embezzlement or willful misapplication of city funds; malfeasance in office or engaging in conspiracy to commit any of the above. Former city managing director Phil Goldsmith said that the city code should be amended to include harsh penalties for employees who committed serious felonies. "If someone has violated the public's trust, they should lose their benefits," he said. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dncrime/Should_criminal_cops_lose_their_pension_.html#Ir21524F2qRuXWwP.99 So...if some of these 6 think they're more apt to be found copeable then the rest they may opt out for an early retirement and skate under any penalties if this city has the same problem that Philly does! So this means that the local government are trying to defund pensions by convicting them. The only difference in the Baltimore case is that 3 cops are Caucasian: 3 cops are African American. I know at least 2 of them has been on the force since the 90s: at a time when pension contributions were relatively low. I looked up the contract and you only need 5 years in service to be eligible for a pension. They would not be eligible for th 5 years if they are fired though. They would not be eligible for full benefits after five year. i.e. health life, etc and only a portion of salary. They must retire to rceive it not go on suspensiom or be fired. I didn't see any list of disqualifications.. The city site has the requirements and benefits listed. That's right they are city cops not state, my bad. now you owe me... haha What do i owe you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for pain and suffering..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for pain and suffering.. How did I make you suffer? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for pain and suffering.. How did I make you suffer? you didn't I was joking |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for pain and suffering.. How did I make you suffer? you didn't I was joking So was I |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
video.fox.news.com/v/25531
Baltimore mayor announced (yesterday) new partnership with the DOJ - Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Conrad_73
on
Wed 05/06/15 08:47 AM
|
|
video.fox.news.com/v/25531 Baltimore mayor announced (yesterday) new partnership with the DOJ - Department of Justice that was the purpose of the whole exercise! Dullston was crowing about it since Ferguson! http://eaglerising.com/18060/al-sharpton-agrees-with-obama-calls-for-unconstitutional-nationalized-police-force/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
video.fox.news.com/v/25531 Baltimore mayor announced (yesterday) new partnership with the DOJ - Department of Justice that was the purpose of the whole exercise! Dullston was crowing about it since Ferguson! http://eaglerising.com/18060/al-sharpton-agrees-with-obama-calls-for-unconstitutional-nationalized-police-force/ Thanks for the link. Conrad_73 Oh GOD... I just glaced threw it. And so did my blood pressure. Pass the aspirin 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If those officers are convicted of murder, what would happen to their pensions? Don't you know? They have already been tried and convicted by the DA and the Injustice Dept. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lets not forget, they have only been charged, not convicted. IMO theres little chance that all the charges will actually stick and the majority of these cops will get off. just my opinion. Given the social implications of those officers and the notoriety of the case, I think it's highly likely that at least 3 of them will be convicted. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prosecutor won't let the attorney for the police see the knife that the thug was carrying in his pants. Go figure..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prosecutor won't let the attorney for the police see the knife that the thug was carrying in his pants. Go figure.. the police took the knife,, that makes no sense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prosecutor won't let the attorney for the police see the knife that the thug was carrying in his pants. Go figure.. the police took the knife,, that makes no sense Yes, it does. The attorney of the officers has requested the right to see the knife. The accused have the right to see ALL the evidence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prosecutor won't let the attorney for the police see the knife that the thug was carrying in his pants. Go figure.. the police took the knife,, that makes no sense Yes, it does. The attorney of the officers has requested the right to see the knife. The accused have the right to see ALL the evidence. if he is attorney for the police , he HAS ACCESS to what the police collected, he has ACCESS to the police report that would have documented wha they took |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prosecutor won't let the attorney for the police see the knife that the thug was carrying in his pants. Go figure.. the police took the knife,, that makes no sense Yes, it does. The attorney of the officers has requested the right to see the knife. The accused have the right to see ALL the evidence. if he is attorney for the police , he HAS ACCESS to what the police collected, he has ACCESS to the police report that would have documented wha they took Yes he is and he does. |
|
|
|
|
