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

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703254 14-Jan-2017 17:59

tripper1000:

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?"

As someone who had a relevant background in terms of prosecuting bad cops, prosecuting cases put forward by cops, and assessing cases put up by cops for the judiciary and defence, I think this rather straightforward assumption -- expressed with a great deal of certitude -- is quite naive. What we know from Frost's pattern of behaviour detailed in that article and the IPCA reports is that he clearly regards himself as being above the law and rules that apply to other people. To protect himself, he is prepared to pressure/coerce people in lesser positions to do his nasty bidding (e.g. getting the PC to use the taser illegally on the suspect) and then lying about his deeds. By any measure, the guy has displayed a pretty clear pattern of sociopathy. If you've ever read a psychological report on criminals or people of questionable character (I've read at least 100) or talked to any forensic psychologists or psychiatrists, you'll know that most agree that people don't just suddenly acquire such lovely traits late in life.

As for the rest of your nonsense....

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. You appear to be totally unaware of how poorly paid legal aid lawyers and crown prosecutors are. Heck, a quick perusal of the news would tell you that wide sectors of society are highly concerned by the cutback to legal aid and people's ability to access justice. And, yes, every cop just joined for the good of the wider world. Really.

2. Cops get fired for lying every time? Have you even read what Mr Frost got up to, for example? You also don't appear to understand that lawyers work within an adversarial system where the law obliges them to present their client's case as their clients demand it (barring certain restrictions). As a former prosecutor, I can tell you that I and many, many others in my position have noted obviously exaggerated evidence (and more than occasionally, albeit still infrequently, blatant BS) by the police but have mercifully declined to bring charges to court. But don't let the facts get in the way of your little rant.

4. Given that you don't even understand the facts regarding how the LCDT's membership is made up, quite why should any intelligent adult take little conspiracy-laden rant seriously is beyond me. TheMinistry of Justice's webpage provides the latest annual report available on the LCDT. As at 30 June 2015 it had 15 lawyer members and 12 non-lawyer members. It doesn't quite fit your narrative, does it?

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703263 14-Jan-2017 18:58

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.

On that note, the publically-known records of quite a lot of Catholic priests that we now know to be pedophiles were quite clear for a period too. But we now know that the Vatican knowingly moved suspect or even guilty priests out of parishes from one area into another, on the magical belief that somehow this will stop them preying on kids. People need to stop kidding themselves that the police is somehow immune to the urge to protect their own or the wider organisation's short-term reputation, instead of doing the right thing.

The degree of blind trust and naivete about an organisation and a group of individuals who are never exactly shy about constantly seeking to expand their scope of power is quite frightening.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18538 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1703272 14-Jan-2017 19:53

Here is the thing. If I was in trouble and needed help, and I had a choice, and the only information I had was that one potential rescuer was a cop, and the other a lawyer, I would choose the cop without the slightest hesitation.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703276 14-Jan-2017 20:00

Depends on what you need rescue from but why get in the way of your facile one-liners?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18538 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1703278 14-Jan-2017 20:11

Actually it was two lines and it wasn't facile if by that you mean frivolous. Lacking any information other than profession, I would place more trust in the cop than the lawyer any day.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703280 14-Jan-2017 20:23

Rikkitic:

Actually it was two lines and it wasn't facile if by that you mean frivolous. Lacking any information other than profession, I would place more trust in the cop than the lawyer any day.

The predictable "It's my opinion; deal with it" nonsense will of course be coming. But implicit in your little rant is a fundamental cheap shot at a recognised profession of thousands of people who at a minimum studied 4 years to practice in it, i.e. a suggestion that they are somehow inherently not trustworthy. Seriously, that's just rude. How would you like people to randomly cheap shot you?

Edit: And, BTW, you might like to study what the word "facile" means -- it doesn't mean what you think it does. Generally speaking, if you're going to make simple, conclusory statements of the type that you made, it's best to make them from a position of being seen as at least semi-informed and educated.

blackjack17

1699 posts

Uber Geek

#1703282 14-Jan-2017 20:35

dejadeadnz:

Rikkitic:

Actually it was two lines and it wasn't facile if by that you mean frivolous. Lacking any information other than profession, I would place more trust in the cop than the lawyer any day.

The predictable "It's my opinion; deal with it" nonsense will of course be coming. But implicit in your little rant is a fundamental cheap shot at a recognised profession of thousands of people who at a minimum studied 4 years to practice in it, i.e. a suggestion that they are somehow inherently not trustworthy. Seriously, that's just rude. How would you like people to randomly cheap shot you?

Edit: And, BTW, you might like to study what the word "facile" means -- it doesn't mean what you think it does. Generally speaking, if you're going to make simple, conclusory statements of the type that you made, it's best to make them from a position of being seen as at least semi-informed and educated.

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).

Electric kiwi signup credit Sharesies credit

sdav

846 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1703294 14-Jan-2017 21:22

dejadeadnz:

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.

On that note, the publically-known records of quite a lot of Catholic priests that we now know to be pedophiles were quite clear for a period too. But we now know that the Vatican knowingly moved suspect or even guilty priests out of parishes from one area into another, on the magical belief that somehow this will stop them preying on kids. People need to stop kidding themselves that the police is somehow immune to the urge to protect their own or the wider organisation's short-term reputation, instead of doing the right thing.

The degree of blind trust and naivete about an organisation and a group of individuals who are never exactly shy about constantly seeking to expand their scope of power is quite frightening.

To be fair, the intent of your comments is quite clear on your opinions of Police. I don't think anyone expects our police to be completely squeaky clean, in fact we know it's not as exampled here. Just like there are some rubbish doctors [insert other comparisons done ad nauseum here].

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.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703299 14-Jan-2017 21:37

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.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18538 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1703312 14-Jan-2017 22:20

dejadeadnz:

Rikkitic:

Actually it was two lines and it wasn't facile if by that you mean frivolous. Lacking any information other than profession, I would place more trust in the cop than the lawyer any day.

The predictable "It's my opinion; deal with it" nonsense will of course be coming. But implicit in your little rant is a fundamental cheap shot at a recognised profession of thousands of people who at a minimum studied 4 years to practice in it, i.e. a suggestion that they are somehow inherently not trustworthy. Seriously, that's just rude. How would you like people to randomly cheap shot you?

Edit: And, BTW, you might like to study what the word "facile" means -- it doesn't mean what you think it does. Generally speaking, if you're going to make simple, conclusory statements of the type that you made, it's best to make them from a position of being seen as at least semi-informed and educated.

I know perfectly well what the word facile means. It actually has several meanings, including superficial, glib, even affable. I kind of like affable but I assumed you were veering more to superficial and glib, in other words, frivolous, of little merit. I also assume the rudeness of your implied suggestion that I am uninformed and uneducated is just spiteful and petty tit for tat. About what one might expect from a lawyer.

The actual point I was making is that while there are undoubtedly good and capable lawyers, and bad and corrupt cops, there is no question that one profession is generally held in much higher regard than the other. I wonder why that might be. Like it or not, that great unwashed public that you seem to view with such disdain does not have a particularly high opinion of lawyers. That must come from somewhere.

In the case of cop vs lawyer, there would always be specifics that might affect which way one would turn for help. A young, inexperienced cop is unlikely to be much good in a life crisis, but overall most police will be used to dealing with difficult situations requiring cool thinking and good judgement. I think the chance of getting good advice from a cop is far greater than the chance of getting good advice from a lawyer, and the fee is certainly much more reasonable.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703315 14-Jan-2017 22:31

Right, thank you for your pile of unsubstantiated series of "I thinks" but their relevance to this topic is what exactly? Or am I being spiteful for pointing out that literally from your first "contribution" here you have added nothing on topic? If you want to launch attacks on people and a profession at large, start your own thread.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18538 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1703319 14-Jan-2017 22:35

OK.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Xile

147 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#1703431 15-Jan-2017 10:59

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.

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

Dairyxox

1594 posts

Uber Geek

#1703448 15-Jan-2017 11:38

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.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1703468 15-Jan-2017 12:20

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.

1 | 2 | 3