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

dejadeadnz

1510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1215

Subscriber

# 207761 12-Jan-2017 20:06

Sergeant criticised twice by IPCA in just over three months quits police

One hardly needs to be a genius to guess that this guy was given the opportunity to quit before he was fired. Having read the latest IPCA report, both Frost and the probationary constable clearly committed an assault. Having prosecuted and defended in the system, I doubt the police will prosecute these guys.

But what's more unbelievable is that Frost managed to hold on to his job (albeit for a short while) after being found to have arbitrarily and unlawfully detained two people for over 15 and 19 hours respectively. And that's not all. Previously, he was convicted after crashing his car and in the view of the police deliberately evading attempts to breath-test him.

The NZ police really don't help themselves when it comes to how they performance manage low-quality humans like Frost. And for the people who like to rag on about the media: whatever their flaws, the newspaper concerned has done NZ a huge favour by publically naming and shaming Frost. It's ridiculous that the IPCA refused to name him despite a very clear pattern of abusing his powers whilst in uniform.

Hopefully, he gets as much opprobrium and contempt as he so richly deserves.

1 | 2 | 3

8189 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4484

# 1702219 12-Jan-2017 20:27

3 people support this post

I'm damned glad the lawyers disciplinary tribunal is quick, effective, ruthless - so we don't need to worry about crooked lawyers.

dejadeadnz

1510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1215

Subscriber

# 1702222 12-Jan-2017 20:37

Fred99:

I'm damned glad the lawyers disciplinary tribunal is quick, effective, ruthless - so we don't need to worry about crooked lawyers.

I am no fan of the Tribunal. It certainly isn't quick but I certainly would argue it holds lawyers to a higher standard than the police does on their own. You quite regularly read about decisions to strike off or suspend lawyers from the roll on the front page of the law society homepage. Have you seen this from the police?

networkn

20032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6100

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1702227 12-Jan-2017 20:52

7 people support this post

dejadeadnz:

Fred99:

I'm damned glad the lawyers disciplinary tribunal is quick, effective, ruthless - so we don't need to worry about crooked lawyers.

I am no fan of the Tribunal. It certainly isn't quick but I certainly would argue it holds lawyers to a higher standard than the police does on their own. You quite regularly read about decisions to strike off or suspend lawyers from the roll on the front page of the law society homepage. Have you seen this from the police?

That's because the most crooked of police is more honest than the most honest of lawyers :)

eracode

Fork 'Andles
3390 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1114

Subscriber

# 1702332 13-Jan-2017 00:12

Frost sounds like a good basis for a plot line in my current fave TV series 'Line of Duty'. Let's get Ted Hastings and his AC12 team onto this.

tukapa1

391 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 53

# 1702908 13-Jan-2017 21:09

One person supports this post

dejadeadnz:

Fred99:

I'm damned glad the lawyers disciplinary tribunal is quick, effective, ruthless - so we don't need to worry about crooked lawyers.

I am no fan of the Tribunal. It certainly isn't quick but I certainly would argue it holds lawyers to a higher standard than the police does on their own. You quite regularly read about decisions to strike off or suspend lawyers from the roll on the front page of the law society homepage. Have you seen this from the police?

And if you believe that about lawyers and the tribunal then you clearly live in cuckoo land....

macuser

2119 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 517

# 1702911 13-Jan-2017 21:12

I was hoping this was a thread about Trump :)

dejadeadnz

1510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1215

Subscriber

# 1702918 13-Jan-2017 22:02

tukapa1:

And if you believe that about lawyers and the tribunal then you clearly live in cuckoo land....

Well, given that I actually routinely read its decisions and have actually worked on prosecutions before it, the chances of me knowing a bit more than you is quite high. Apparently all the orders for striking off and suspensions were made in cuckoo land too.

Torque

333 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 14

# 1702956 13-Jan-2017 22:42

dejadeadnz:
Fred99:

I'm damned glad the lawyers disciplinary tribunal is quick, effective, ruthless - so we don't need to worry about crooked lawyers.

I am no fan of the Tribunal. It certainly isn't quick but I certainly would argue it holds lawyers to a higher standard than the police does on their own. You quite regularly read about decisions to strike off or suspend lawyers from the roll on the front page of the law society homepage. Have you seen this from the police?

Yes, but as you would acknowledge, the Tribunal is independent and does not employ the lawyers it holds to account. NZ Police directly employ those you refer to, so an employer/employee relationship comes into play, with the associated constraints...

Aredwood

3721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1624

Subscriber

# 1702958 13-Jan-2017 22:50

One person supports this post

Alot of it comes back to police pay rates being too low. And not enough police officers Vs the amount of work they are expected to do. So it makes it difficult to attract quality applicants. There is pressure not to performance manage or dismiss problem staff as they would be more difficult to replace. And it makes corruption more likely, As it is alot harder to resist a bribe if you are under financial stress.

As usual another case of the government being short sighted.

networkn

20032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6100

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1702959 13-Jan-2017 23:01

2 people support this post

Aredwood:

Alot of it comes back to police pay rates being too low. And not enough police officers Vs the amount of work they are expected to do. So it makes it difficult to attract quality applicants. There is pressure not to performance manage or dismiss problem staff as they would be more difficult to replace. And it makes corruption more likely, As it is alot harder to resist a bribe if you are under financial stress.

As usual another case of the government being short sighted.

I agree police are underpaid but it's not as simple as that, because so are teachers, there aren't enough Doctors and the list goes on. The money doesn't grow on trees, so what do we cut?

Maybe some lawyers could take a paycut to help fund the Police :)

tukapa1

391 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 53

# 1703027 14-Jan-2017 06:10

dejadeadnz:

tukapa1:

And if you believe that about lawyers and the tribunal then you clearly live in cuckoo land....

Well, given that I actually routinely read its decisions and have actually worked on prosecutions before it, the chances of me knowing a bit more than you is quite high. Apparently all the orders for striking off and suspensions were made in cuckoo land too.

This is a perfect example of assumption being the mother of all **** ups!

dejadeadnz

1510 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1215

Subscriber

# 1703046 14-Jan-2017 08:38

Torque: Yes, but as you would acknowledge, the Tribunal is independent and does not employ the lawyers it holds to account. NZ Police directly employ those you refer to, so an employer/employee relationship comes into play, with the associated constraints...

Sure, my response was merely to the people who insist on bringing lawyers into this discussion. Nonetheless, whatever constraints the police had, as someone who has worked in both the legal and risk fields for or on behalf of similarly sized large corporates (and have been regularly involved in either making or recommending decisions on whether to fire/"force out" clearly terrible and unethical employees), I can safely say that none of the corporates would have allowed anyone who has done things 1/3 as bad as Frost to stay as long as he did.

It might require a financial settlement, or even a risk of a ERA battle (although in truth rarely do people who have fallen as far short as this idiot go through with any threat to sue, as someone at the employer can always tip off a reporter and their future prospects become much grimmer) -- but if one takes upholding a certain level of standards seriously, it's worth it. I also find it quite disturbing that Frost was allowed to resign. At the culmination of all the incidents featured in the article, any fair and reasonable employer would have had sufficient grounds to summarily dismiss him inside the typical resignation notice period. Being summarily dismissed usually means that an employee is not entitled to various benefits guaranteed under the relevant employment agreement.

tukapa1: This is a perfect example of assumption being the mother of all **** ups!

Well, given that you've contributed nothing other than useless one-liners, I guess this is a continuing pattern of excellent, on-point contributions, eh?

Torque

333 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 14

# 1703073 14-Jan-2017 10:24

I agree he should have gone much sooner, but sometimes these things are seen in isolation - potentially more so if the local bosses (Senior Sergeant, Inspector and above) aren't in the location for very long and may not see the bigger picture or pattern of behaviour.

I worked for NZP for quite some time and have seen people get absolutely smashed by the department, some people get away with things with a slap on the wrist at best and sometimes people get what they deserve. Almost all of which never comes out publicly.

Police were looking at a management system/program to lodge a fair bit of data into and advise if someone started to show signs of going off the rails (i.e inputting public complaints, tactical option reports, observations from other staff, IPCA findings etc) however have no idea where that is at.

Bung

2777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 460

# 1703114 14-Jan-2017 12:28

2 people support this post

"Going off the rails" is the thing. The cop has 28 years service. Unless the move from Auckland to the West Coast is code for last chance the record as least publicly seems clear until the last couple of years.

tripper1000

918 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 570

# 1703244 14-Jan-2017 17:21

Bung: "Going off the rails" is the thing. The cop has 28 years service. Unless the move from Auckland to the West Coast is code for last chance the record as least publicly seems clear until the last couple of years.

Yeah, +1 this comment.

I'd expect he kept his job for 28 years by being pretty good at it for at least 25 years. A better question would be "what happened to break this guy?"

Lawyers and Police are very different and their disciplinary boards and their relative strike off rates can't be compared fairly.

1) Cops deal with the worst of the worst people, when those people are at their worst, for little more reward than knowing it is for the greater good of society - lawyers on the other hand deal with highly motivated, sober people in controlled environments when they're most motivated stage and do it for monetary gain.

2) Lawyers and their clients seem to be entitled to lie and stretch the truth out of this world, Cops get fired for lying.

3) Police have loads of vexatious/revenge based complaints against them - mostly by crooks who incorrectly think they're somehow above the law.

4) The Lawyers board does have a conflict of sorts, in that lawyers are effectively members of a Professional labour Cartel and the fewer lawyers there are, the higher their respective hourly rate will be.

1 | 2 | 3