TexasCHLforum.com

To me, it is obvious he needs to be punished and I think being fired should only be the first step.

paperchunker wrote:http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/dallas/C ... 25411.html

Officer fired. Partner placed on restricted duty.

If he did lie he definitely deserved to be fired. It will be interesting to see if he files a lawsuit to get his job back as is the case sometimes. IF this is a case where he did lie vs perception, that is sad. If he had just told the truth he might have been cleared. I know after a shooting many things race through your head, but lying should never be one.

texanjoker wrote: IF this is a case where he did lie vs perception, that is sad. If he had just told the truth he might have been cleared. I know after a shooting many things race through your head, but lying should never be one.

Integrity is all an Officer has.

carlson1 wrote:

texanjoker wrote: IF this is a case where he did lie vs perception, that is sad. If he had just told the truth he might have been cleared. I know after a shooting many things race through your head, but lying should never be one.

Integrity is all an Officer has.

Yup - we were taught from day ONE that if you lie you are fired. I have seen guys fired when if they had told the truth they would have still had a job. I see cases here in TX where officers have a history of being disciplined for lying and still have their jobs? I never get that.

Not trying to add fuel to the fire but stating my opinion.

If his "perception" was that far off, he should not be a cop. The situation was not near as volatile and intense as it could have been. He used bad judgment and then lied to cover it up. He just didn't know there was a recording and eye witness.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/dallas-o ... -man-fired" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fire and charged with a felony.

mojo84 wrote:http://bigstory.ap.org/article/dallas-o ... -man-fired

Fire and charged with a felony.

Partially correct. The officer was fired, but the judge the police asked to sign the arrest warrant refused to do so, and suggested the DPD present the case to the grand jury directly. So Chief Brown later said that's what they're going to do.

And now, DPD-IA is to investigate the officer's partner, who by the way is the one that wrote the offense report. His goose is probably cooked, as well, since the story the shooter told apparently (according to the WBAP news reporter) did not match what the offense report said.

A police affidavit says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.” Surveillance footage shows otherwise –– Bennett never raises his arms or takes a step toward the approaching officers.

I don't know why, if you screwed up as a LEO, that you'd ever admit it. The only down side would be a non-firing offense that you get caught lying about.
Where is the dash cam footage here? It looks like a cam from part of a residence.

cb1000rider wrote:

A police affidavit says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.” Surveillance footage shows otherwise –– Bennett never raises his arms or takes a step toward the approaching officers.

I don't know why, if you screwed up as a LEO, that you'd ever admit it. The only down side would be a non-firing offense that you get caught lying about.
Where is the dash cam footage here? It looks like a cam from part of a residence.

Neighbors security camera. The neighbor was also an eyewitness.

cb1000rider wrote:

A police affidavit says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.” Surveillance footage shows otherwise –– Bennett never raises his arms or takes a step toward the approaching officers.

I don't know why, if you screwed up as a LEO, that you'd ever admit it. The only down side would be a non-firing offense that you get caught lying about.

Because honorable people do the right thing, not the expedient? Because lying on an official report is against the law and you're a law enforcement officer? Because lying demonstrates your lack of character and shouts out that you can't be trusted? Because lying alienates the public and reduces public support making the job harder for you and everyone else in law enforcement? Because lying is toxic and undermines the basis of every meaningful relationship you'll ever have in life? Because an attitude like you've expressed --that lying has no significant consequences-- breeds habitual lying and pollutes an institution that must function on trust?

VMI77 wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:

A police affidavit says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.” Surveillance footage shows otherwise –– Bennett never raises his arms or takes a step toward the approaching officers.

I don't know why, if you screwed up as a LEO, that you'd ever admit it. The only down side would be a non-firing offense that you get caught lying about.

Because honorable people do the right thing, not the expedient? Because lying on an official report is against the law and you're a law enforcement officer? Because lying demonstrates your lack of character and shouts out that you can't be trusted? Because lying alienates the public and reduces public support making the job harder for you and everyone else in law enforcement? Because lying is toxic and undermines the basis of every meaningful relationship you'll ever have in life? Because an attitude like you've expressed --that lying has no significant consequences-- breeds habitual lying and pollutes an institution that must function on trust?

that when a LEO lies to cover their bacon they should be toast. I do have questions on this case that have not been answered. A silent video does not tell the whole story.

n5wd wrote:

mojo84 wrote:http://bigstory.ap.org/article/dallas-o ... -man-fired

Fire and charged with a felony.

Partially correct. The officer was fired, but the judge the police asked to sign the arrest warrant refused to do so, and suggested the DPD present the case to the grand jury directly. So Chief Brown later said that's what they're going to do.

And now, DPD-IA is to investigate the officer's partner, who by the way is the one that wrote the offense report. His goose is probably cooked, as well, since the story the shooter told apparently (according to the WBAP news reporter) did not match what the offense report said.

That would mean that judge, who was presented the affidavit, did not believe there is enough evidence at this point. "Weaker" cases often go to the grand jury to see if they indict. Remember we are only reading what the media is telling us. There are many questions to be asked and answered. For me I want to know if the leo lied or if it is a perception issue resulting from a critical incident where he believed something to be happening. Seeing that the deceased got up, that could be a partial reality. Time will tell.

texanjoker wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:

A police affidavit says Bennett “took several steps toward them with the knife raised in an aggressive manner.” Surveillance footage shows otherwise –– Bennett never raises his arms or takes a step toward the approaching officers.

I don't know why, if you screwed up as a LEO, that you'd ever admit it. The only down side would be a non-firing offense that you get caught lying about.

Because honorable people do the right thing, not the expedient? Because lying on an official report is against the law and you're a law enforcement officer? Because lying demonstrates your lack of character and shouts out that you can't be trusted? Because lying alienates the public and reduces public support making the job harder for you and everyone else in law enforcement? Because lying is toxic and undermines the basis of every meaningful relationship you'll ever have in life? Because an attitude like you've expressed --that lying has no significant consequences-- breeds habitual lying and pollutes an institution that must function on trust?

that when a LEO lies to cover their bacon they should be toast.

And so should politicians and other government employees who aren't LEO's.

texanjoker wrote:

n5wd wrote:

mojo84 wrote:http://bigstory.ap.org/article/dallas-o ... -man-fired

Fire and charged with a felony.

Partially correct. The officer was fired, but the judge the police asked to sign the arrest warrant refused to do so, and suggested the DPD present the case to the grand jury directly. So Chief Brown later said that's what they're going to do.

And now, DPD-IA is to investigate the officer's partner, who by the way is the one that wrote the offense report. His goose is probably cooked, as well, since the story the shooter told apparently (according to the WBAP news reporter) did not match what the offense report said.

That would mean that judge, who was presented the affidavit, did not believe there is enough evidence at this point. "Weaker" cases often go to the grand jury to see if they indict. Remember we are only reading what the media is telling us. There are many questions to be asked and answered. For me I want to know if the leo lied or if it is a perception issue resulting from a critical incident where he believed something to be happening. Seeing that the deceased got up, that could be a partial reality. Time will tell.

I by no means am an expert in such as this but I think it just means the judge wants the grand jury to make the decision and doesn't necessarily reflect his opinion of whether or not there is a deficiency in evidence.

I still think if his"perception" was off that much, there is a problem that may disqualify him from the position of being a leo. Hopefully they will get to the bottom of this soon and make their findings public.

texanjoker wrote:

n5wd wrote:

mojo84 wrote:http://bigstory.ap.org/article/dallas-o ... -man-fired

Fire and charged with a felony.

Partially correct. The officer was fired, but the judge the police asked to sign the arrest warrant refused to do so, and suggested the DPD present the case to the grand jury directly. So Chief Brown later said that's what they're going to do.

And now, DPD-IA is to investigate the officer's partner, who by the way is the one that wrote the offense report. His goose is probably cooked, as well, since the story the shooter told apparently (according to the WBAP news reporter) did not match what the offense report said.

That would mean that judge, who was presented the affidavit, did not believe there is enough evidence at this point.

OR, the judge decided that there was no immediate need for the officer to be arrested, and decided to punt to the grand jury.... OR.... it could be that he thinks he's keeping solidarity with the rank-and-file of the department.

texanjoker wrote:"Weaker" cases often go to the grand jury to see if they indict. Remember we are only reading what the media is telling us. There are many questions to be asked and answered. For me I want to know if the leo lied or if it is a perception issue resulting from a critical incident where he believed something to be happening. Seeing that the deceased got up, that could be a partial reality. Time will tell.

Deceased?