The "How did this guy keep his job so long" thread

Forums › Off topic › The "How did this guy keep his job so long" thread

1 | 2 | 3

Xile

155 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#1703478 15-Jan-2017 12:36

dejadeadnz:

Xile:

Perhaps then, if you feel so strongly about it, you should bring a private prosecution.

Novel concept: some of us actually do have a life to live, work to do, and actually feel that the police and state should do the right thing. And given your open admission of having a law enforcement background elsewhere, there couldn't possibly be any kind of bias in your response, can there?

Dairyxox: I think as far as police are concerned, there is a case of 'the old guard' and the modern officers.

Years ago, the police were a bit of a law unto themselves. It wasn't uncommon to see them behaving more like gangs now, using intimidation or worse against people that got offside (rather than have broken any laws).

Over time the NZ culture has become more "politically correct", and I'd imagine new recruits would generally be more sensitive to 'modern' taboos.

In my experience, the younger officers are undoubtedly far more open-minded and able to de-escalate conflicts with suspects/uncooperative people, rather than resorting to shouting or physical force far too early. In court when giving evidence, I also notice that the former group are far more willing to concede that they might not have seen everything, could have been wrong, and so forth. And it's undoubtedly the case that the young recruits now are objectively better qualified, educated and rounded human beings than the likes of Sociopath Frost, many of whom all in likelihood did not even finish high school and have essentially subjected their fellow taxpayers with decades of mediocrity within the organisation.

And there is a lot of research and literature in the US and elsewhere that suggests that female officers are far less likely to resort to force and be the subject of complaints. With greater gender balance and the continuing improvement of recruit standards, things should get better for the police. Long may that continue.

Yet you have the time to slate the police, Mr Frost and criticise any who have opposing or contrary opinions to yours. And not in a polite manner I might add.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703497 15-Jan-2017 12:57

Oh yes, what a vicious slating I delivered to the police when I supported the better recruitment standards and expressed the sentiment that they are improving. And how terrible that I pointed to objective facts from the IPCA report and what is clearly known about Sociopath Frost. But don't let any facts get in your way. Keep the one-liners up!

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1703591 15-Jan-2017 16:51

dejadeadnz:

In my experience, the younger officers are undoubtedly far more open-minded and able to de-escalate conflicts with suspects/uncooperative people, rather than resorting to shouting or physical force far too early. In court when giving evidence, I also notice that the former group are far more willing to concede that they might not have seen everything, could have been wrong, and so forth. And it's undoubtedly the case that the young recruits now are objectively better qualified, educated and rounded human beings than the likes of Sociopath Frost, many of whom all in likelihood did not even finish high school and have essentially subjected their fellow taxpayers with decades of mediocrity within the organisation.

And there is a lot of research and literature in the US and elsewhere that suggests that female officers are far less likely to resort to force and be the subject of complaints. With greater gender balance and the continuing improvement of recruit standards, things should get better for the police. Long may that continue.

I am sure you would eviscerate someone who made a similar level of guess or supposition in a comparable set of statements.

Do you have any evidence to support the "decades of mediocrity" or the suggestion he didn't finish school? Was he officially diagnosed as a Sociopath?

tukapa1

725 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1703771 15-Jan-2017 20:59

He (dejadeadnz) seems to have diagnosed Frost as a sociopath from two IPCA reports in his 28 years of service.

I can't see anything else to support the diagnosis.

And as for the officers education history - I have to come to the conclusion that he is making an assumption, same as he did when he assumed he knew what experience I have in these things, and that he (dejadeadnz) has more.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703830 15-Jan-2017 22:02

networkn:

I am sure you would eviscerate someone who made a similar level of guess or supposition in a comparable set of statements.

Do you have any evidence to support the "decades of mediocrity" or the suggestion he didn't finish school? Was he officially diagnosed as a Sociopath?

Let's look at what I said in context, shall we? Rather than what you'd like to make up.

I wrote, in reference to my opinion on the more recent recruits:

the young recruits now are objectively better qualified, educated and rounded human beings than the likes of Sociopath Frost, many of whom all in likelihood did not even finish high school and have essentially subjected their fellow taxpayers with decades of mediocrity within the organisation.

As anyone who reads my contribution in these topics know, I do have a relevant background and quite a bit of relevant experience in the criminal justice system. The evidence for this goes well beyond my own asserted (and definitely true) experiences, to the fact that I am able to routinely marshall references to statutes, case law, and relevant judicial cases/quasi-judicial reports to support my assertions and opinions and to correct the misinformed (and in some cases) deliberate misinformation by posters on here. In my opinion, based on having analysed, prosecuted, and defended probably hundreds of criminal court files, a lot of so called senior officers like Frost are poorly educated and poor performing, as evidenced by their behaviour in court, poor standards of report and statement writing, and when challenged by other investigative bodies. Do I know for a fact that Mr Sociopath Frost is mediocre and uneducated? Nope. But the important point is that I did not assert this. Do the words "in all likelihood" mean anything to you? So, if you are going to accuse anyone of anything, it helps to start off from a position of not twisting his words.

And are you aware that notions of sociopathy extend beyond a formal, psychological diagnosis? If I said that Frost was diagnosed as a sociopath, then I would be wrong. Culturally and by way of dictionary definition, sociopathy connotes a serious, antisocial lack of regard for others and the norms of society. I've already highlighted some of the objectively proven evidence that suggests Frost as displaying broadly sociopathic tendencies: (1) he flagarantly disregarded the law on the rights of two suspects by illegally detaining them for 15 and 19 hours respectively; (2) he ordered a PC (a person with little to no power to resist him) to unlawfully taser a suspect not once but twice but deliberately omitted the fact that he did; (3) he did not immediately present himself to be breath-tested after crashing his car, when as a senior police officer he would know full well that the police would be interested in doing this after an accident. As a person applying common sense and drawing a reasonable inference, I say he did this because he had something to hide. And common human experience also tells us that people do not tend to magically develop these kinds of nasty tendencies mid-life.

Now, would you like to come up with any arguments to refute any of the above? And you know what is really funny? There are lots of sentencing notes around where judges describe prisoners being sentenced as having behaved sociopathically (in a general sense, judges know the difference between this and a DSM-IV diagnosis -- you do know what the latter is, right?). Are you going to fund the appeals of all those prisoners who have been so tragically "misdiagnosed"?

Networkn, anyone who cares to examine my posting record on here knows that I go to quite a lot of effort when posting and tend to confine myself to topics on which I have some genuine knowledge. I can't always say I am an expert but on these types of matters, I pretty much do not post unless I have some specialist and actual knowledge. You seem to get incredibly riled up by things that I say or have this need to obsessively pick away at my posts. But simply on account of actual effort expended and respective differences in knowledge of the relevant matters at hand, one would suggest you should find some other past time.

tukapa1:

He (dejadeadnz) seems to have diagnosed Frost as a sociopath from two IPCA reports in his 28 years of service.

I can't see anything else to support the diagnosis.

And as for the officers education history - I have to come to the conclusion that he is making an assumption, same as he did when he assumed he knew what experience I have in these things, and that he (dejadeadnz) has more.

As for your made-up fantasies, see above. Of course I am making an assumption about what you know about these things. An assumption is not of itself wrong -- you do understand this, right? When you see a bus hurtling towards you, do you assume (reasonably I might add) that having it crashing into you at speed will likely, if not almost certainly, result in death? Now do you understand how reasonable assumptions must underlay living generally and debates?

All you've "offered" in this thread are these assertions (I've broadly rephrased them):

- That anyone who believes that the LCDT holds lawyers to account is in cuckoo land.

- That my assumption that you know little about the LCDT (formed on the basis of your extremely strongly stated, absolutist opinion regarding the LCDT) is some f up.

Well, I am sorry to disappoint you but what else do you expect? When I've practiced in front of the LCDT, prepared cases going in front of it, and know how it works, and the constitution of its membership, it's pretty hard to take the view of someone who expressed your views seriously. If you know so much about the LCDT, how it works, and how it utterly fails to hold lawyers to account, put the facts up. Until then, the phrase "put up or shut up" is apposite.

Torque

379 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1703887 16-Jan-2017 07:20

Policing nowdays is representative of society - the good, the bad and the ugly.

As Deja has alluded to, with the recruitment practices these days, the quality of canditates accepted should improve. It's no longer a bastion of white male supremacy (/thuggery), those with more brawn than brains of those who got declined into the NZDF (all of which anecdotally, and in my experience it used to be, to some degree).

JimsonWeed

126 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#1703890 16-Jan-2017 07:38

blackjack17:

What Rikkitic was saying is as a whole the profession of law enforcement is held in higher trust than that of a lawyer. Whether or not he/she was taking shots at lawyers I do feel that it is true.

From a personal point of view I can name a couple of people that have been taken advantage and have lost a lot of money by lawyers (both of the lawyers were jailed, if for a very short time), I don't (personally) know anyone that has had poor/unfair treatment by police (my anecdotal view point).

It's funny that "lawyers" don't stop at being lawyers, they are also the law makers, the judges, and the bulk of politicians that make it to the top. If they're such the crooked lot, do you really think they believe cops "all the time"? The simple fact is, when a person is in trouble, they will often say and do anything to get out of trouble. When a person legitimately needs help, they will often be more truthful when seeking justice than the ones trying to dodge justice.

So, you get pulled over for speeding or drink driving... unless it's obvious that the cop has a hardon for your conviction, you can probably wager that the cop isn't fabricating the event. On the other hand, is it plausible that a cop would "fudge" evidence one way or another to get a conviction - yeah, it is. It happens more than you know. Add a piece here... lose a piece there... date this one way... date that another. Fortunately, we live in an age where we can video just about everything. Unfortunately, the context of these videos can be misconstrued.

Crooked lawyers? Of course! Crooked cops? Of course! Why not throw in crooked Doctors, Accountants, Priests, etc, etc, etc. All of the "noble" professions have been tainted by scandal for centuries. It's just that if you keep white-washing the labels with the ideal model, people will continue to believe that is what the role is supposed to represent. We're just humans... some are simply sorrier than others.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

sdav

846 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1704437 17-Jan-2017 00:28

dejadeadnz:

sdav:

I have no doubt this is some poor decision making (that's being light) but I'm not prepared to make assumptions further than what I have read from an article (I didn't read the IPCA report).

A lot is expected of police (rightly so) and I have been witness to how intense some of the scrutiny is in general complaints to police and IPCA complaints but IMO there is a difference between a proby cop feeling the pressure to taser someone from his sergeant and the sergeants actions. Apologies if I mis-understood your initial comment but if you think the probational cop is no better than the Sergant because they pulled the trigger, I think you are forgetting the police are humans and being in their position is "unenviable" and that's Sir David Carruthers word.

Maybe it took too long for him to leave, maybe things changed in the last two to four for him, the right decision has been made.

You really need to read the IPCA report before defending some of the characters concerned.

An unjustifiable use of force on someone is a criminal assault in law. As far as I am concerned, both the PC and Frost should be prosecuted and fired. If you read the IPCA report, the PC made the following statement to the police:

In a statement prepared for the Police, Officer D said, “I had reservations about discharging the Taser with deployed probes because Mr X was not at that time assaultive, rather he was an actively non-compliant and resistant prisoner”.

In my professional assessment, this is more than enough for a prima facie case for prosecute.

He at least had some suspicion that the order was unlawful and should not have acted on it. Following superior orders has not been a per se defence in, for example, trials for war crimes. For heaven's sake, remember this: you can't even get away with doing crimes during a war just because your superior told you to do X. Why should a police officer? There was no life and death threat here. If I were a sentencing judge, say, I certainly would go a lot easier on the PC than Frost but an unjustified/unlawful use of force remains that.

And I absolutely wouldn't say "maybe" to the notion that it took too long for Mr Sociopath Frost to leave. People need to be more questioning and skeptical of those in positions of power, rather than adopting this strange deference to them.

I'm not really defending anyone (I'm not invested in the people enough), merely offering comment on an article you linked.

I had a quick skim of the IPCA. Mostly everything they pick up on is a breach of police policy, rather than law. It was decided that the use of a contact stun was disproportionate use of force which is interesting as the taser is designed to also be used for pain compliance (which they refer to as being another option) in other jurisdictions. So is it excessive force in regards to police policy or is it criminal use of force? The IPCA did not comment on it being unlawful, just disproportionate and unjustified were the words used.

Personally, I don't like the use of taser for pain compliance though, too easy to abuse.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18659 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1705109 18-Jan-2017 10:42

I note an item on RNZ News today about someone accidentally locked in a court holding cell over the weekend. The area commander issued an unreserved apology and accepted full responsibility with no attempt at equivocation or minimising the impact on the person. Maybe it is worth mentioning that the area commander is a woman.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1706774 21-Jan-2017 00:10

Rikkitic:

I note an item on RNZ News today about someone accidentally locked in a court holding cell over the weekend. The area commander issued an unreserved apology and accepted full responsibility with no attempt at equivocation or minimising the impact on the person. Maybe it is worth mentioning that the area commander is a woman.

I thought her apology was better than the usual rubbish but it still was nothing great. Most news media reported her waxing lyrical about so sorry the police officer involved felt. As a citizen who expects the police to exercise their powers responsibly and diligently, I expect nothing less than the officer involved feeling like garbage after being so thoroughly incompetent. The fact of itself is of no interest whatsoever to me. And I love how the cop went out of her way to deny anyone the slightest opportunity to know who the officer might be by repeatedly (and wrongly) using the pronoun "they" to refer to a single person. Employees are entitled to their privacy but no laws require anyone to self-suppress even the gender of the police officer involved in this instance.

It's time police officers were made subject to armed forces-like discipline, where incompetence and misconduct are treated as serious disciplinary offences akin to what is in the military justice codes. Examples like what happened to Frost and stupid jurors who often emotively side with the police when they are criminally charged for misconduct means that the ordinary criminal justice system is not sufficiently effective in deterring bad conduct by the police IMO. And the IPCA really, really let itself down by failing to name Frost. Thank goodness for the media.

Dratsab

3946 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1706809 21-Jan-2017 08:58

All I get from this thread is that you've used a recent example to hop on a high horse and, within a few posts, express your vehement hatred of police along with a willingness to absolutely 'go to town' on anyone who dares raise any form of opinion that doesn't align with yours. I don't really see the point. It's not the first time you've gone down this path either. There's plenty of cop hating forums on the internet, why don't you post in those instead?

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1706836 21-Jan-2017 10:07

Dratsab: All I get from this thread is that you've used a recent example to hop on a high horse and, within a few posts, express your vehement hatred of police along with a willingness to absolutely 'go to town' on anyone who dares raise any form of opinion that doesn't align with yours. I don't really see the point. It's not the first time you've gone down this path either. There's plenty of cop hating forums on the internet, why don't you post in those instead?

Well put.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1706863 21-Jan-2017 11:34

sdav:

I'm not really defending anyone (I'm not invested in the people enough), merely offering comment on an article you linked.

I had a quick skim of the IPCA. Mostly everything they pick up on is a breach of police policy, rather than law. It was decided that the use of a contact stun was disproportionate use of force which is interesting as the taser is designed to also be used for pain compliance (which they refer to as being another option) in other jurisdictions. So is it excessive force in regards to police policy or is it criminal use of force? The IPCA did not comment on it being unlawful, just disproportionate and unjustified were the words used.

Personally, I don't like the use of taser for pain compliance though, too easy to abuse.

It's not a matter of whether you like or don't like use of taser for pain compliance -- this is against police policy and a prima facie breach of the law (I've already explained what a prima facie breach of the law/a prima facie case for prosecution is). My point, for the last time, is that as someone who's experienced in criminal prosecution, defence and in the judicial arena in criminal law, I can see no reasonable reason why Frost and the PC wasn't prosecuted. A jury or judge can decide whether they are factually guilty of a criminal offence or not. The Crimes Act supports my argument:

Section 39:

Force used in executing process or in arrest

Where any person is justified, or protected from criminal responsibility, in executing or assisting to execute any sentence, warrant, or process, or in making or assisting to make any arrest, that justification or protection shall extend and apply to the use by him or her of such force as may be necessary to overcome any force used in resisting such execution or arrest, unless the sentence, warrant, or process can be executed or the arrest made by reasonable means in a less violent manner:

provided that, except in the case of a constable or a person called upon by a constable to assist him or her, this section shall not apply where the force used is intended or likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm (the bolded bits are my emphasis)

The IPCA has already noted, for example, that the person tasered was not actively resisting and that the use of the car door on his (presumably covered) foot was a tactical option open to the cops. And then we have section 62:

Excess of force

Every one authorised by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess, according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.

Do you still want to argue?

Dratsab: All I get from this thread is that you've used a recent example to hop on a high horse and, within a few posts, express your vehement hatred of police along with a willingness to absolutely 'go to town' on anyone who dares raise any form of opinion that doesn't align with yours. I don't really see the point. It's not the first time you've gone down this path either. There's plenty of cop hating forums on the internet, why don't you post in those instead?

I have no problems with people taking a different view (although I do note that it's really quite hard for any reasonable person to defend the conduct of Frost and the Police at large here). For example, I vehemently disagree with sdav's views but at least (unlike Tukapa1 and Networkn for example) he hasn't gone ahead and made up "facts" or attributed motives to me that I don't hold.

Do I have a somewhat strong distaste for the NZ Police at large? Sure. But it's not borne out of this case (and of course this thread is focussed on discussing the one case of Frost -- it reflects the title of the thread) but rather years of seeing how poor it is as an institution. My opinion of the police would be a lot higher if their management would spend a little less time congratulating itself, telling everybody how hard they have it (so do most other professions), and actually have a set of standards and barrier of entry for candidates that are at least broadly within a stratosphere of recognised professions like medicine, law and engineering. Because, after all, the police are never shy in pretending that it has standards similar to those inherent to the other real professions.

I don't doubt that most individual police officers are well-minded and decent people. And where people are unjustifiably slating the police, I have even gone on the record here vigorously defending them. I mean I even managed to do it in a thread where I had made similarly pointed criticisms against the police as well.

networkn:

Well put.

Another quality Networkn contribution to boost his post count.

1 | 2 | 3