Blue Privilege at its Finest!

With all the Defund Police! madenss going on right now, both with BLM and on this forum, I thought I would spend some time showing a story of an officer who is privileged to serve his community. This guy put himself in harm’s way to do good. Here’s a quote from the news story (Hat tip CNN):

“As Cristobal Marin was driving Monday to pick up feed for his horses in Socorro, a city in El Paso County, he saw a large plume of smoke. Marin told CNN he turned in the direction of the smoke, which was coming from a residential area, to see if he could help. When he arrived, he said an officer wearing a bulletproof vest and face mask was running out of the flames carrying a child.”

Link to story:

I was in a thread where it was said that cops are generally not BAD people. It was the same thread that declared that cops are not our friends. I for one am glad this officer was around and would consider him a good example of the good work being done every day by LEOs across the country.


That’s all well and good, but will he support or condemn his fellow officers who engage in misconduct. That’s the general complaint about police as a group, not that they are all bad actors. Complicity is just as bad as being bad.

1 Like

Do you truly think all officers cover for the ones committing misconduct, or is this something you’ve seen on TV?

Yes, I think it is built into the system.

1 Like

That may be your impression, but I would like to point out that cops report misconduct every day… you just don’t hear about it because it’s not as newsworthy.

I really don’t think you’ll find cops reporting on other cops misconduct every day.

It happens. I have experience with it. You just don’t hear about it because it doesn’t feed a 24-hour news cycle dependent upon extreme negativity in their stories.

Are there idiots out there who still try to protect their own? Yep. But it is inaccurate to apply one standard to all.

Yep. It just doesn’t make the news unless a bystander videos and it releases the video the internet.

For example, a cop on my PD was involved in a domestic incident that was pretty bad and where he really ****** up by pointing a gun at his girlfriend during a drunken rage. He told his friend on the PD who brought him immediately to the PD. Supervisor on duty immediately took the officers gun and badge and put him on administrative leave. This all occurred in another county so they also contacted authorities in that county to go find the girlfriend for a report. She wasn’t very cooperative refusing to talk initially to the officers. Which left the criminal case in limbo but the officer stayed on admin leave in the meantime. Eventually the girl did talk and criminal charges were filed.

Meanwhile the officer stayed on admin leave this whole time. Some may wonder why he wasn’t fired immediately so here is why and here is why many depts who immediately fire cops without an investigation are playing with fire when the cop sues to get his job back. Internal investigations and terminations while being criminally investigated are tricky as cops have 5th amendment rights and can constitutionally refuse to talk to the police and constitutionally cannot have that silence used against them - goes right to the heart of the 5th amendment and Miranda. So when your employer is the police and govt can you legally punish them for not talking. Its a catch 22 and was dealt with in a Supreme Court decision known as Garrity. Essentially it says that if your dept reads you Garrity you must talk or be fired but nothing you say can be used against you criminally. So my PD and many don’t do any internal investigation until the criminal is done. That way there is no conflict between the 5th amendment and Garrity.

None of this hit the news nor would it have except someone leaked it.

Point is that this kind of stuff happens all the time, officers turning in other officers. You just don’t hear about it. Another officer at my PD got turned in for DUI. Stopped by an officer on the PD who handed it off to the state police so there would be no claims of bias or favoritism.

Not unless they feel like they’ll get reprimanded for not doing so.

Which is why agencies need unions and other job protections. If your an at will employee, which is what all the protesters want to turn police into by getting rid of unions and job protections, then you can be fired without cause. So catch an administrator doing something illegal like driving drunk and you just flushed your job away if your at will unless you look the other way.

I lived it. Early in my career (1990s) I caught a lieutenant doing something illegal (drunk driving) and called for a supervisor who then gave the LT a ride home. I thought that was wrong and reported it up the chain of command. The next few years of my life were pure hell as they tried to find ways to drive me to quit including reassigning me to work directly under the drunk supervisor. Rank and file officers supported me but all the friends of the Lt who were mostly supervisors put a target on me. However I never got fired because they had no cause to fire me under my civil service protections which require progressive discipline and cause to fire an officer.

If people want officers to be unafraid to stand up to corruption and illegal activities by other officers then you need ensure those officers feel safe knowing they won’t be fired for it. Meaning there have to be job protections. They won’t be stupid enough to fire the officer for the actual event, they’ll find another reason and be waiting for the first complaint or minor policy violation to drop the bomb on the officer. Everyone will know you got fired for turning it Lt Dumb**** for DUI but on paper it will say you got fired for a rudeness complaint or being 5 minutes late to work one night.

So, that’s a fair question. I have a good back-ground for responding, however. I am a municipal union side attorney, and I’ve represented a fair number of police misconduct claims. There is definitely an ingrained response among the police, all the way up the command chain, to cover up claims so they don’t surface, and if they do, to back the charged officers unquestioningly. About the only exception is if the charged officer is generally a “misfit” that the rank and file would just as soon seen gone anyway.

Hope that answers your question.

Agin, there’s another side to this. It’s not just the reprimand from above for not reporting. It’s the lateral consequences of reporting. An officer who reports may face a lack of back-up at crucial moments. I had one of a pair of cops who were perceived as “too honest” about such things, who found himself (the other guy too) framed by the Chief and the Mayor, and faced criminal charges. I defended the one guy on the criminal charge, and at the the conclusion (acquittal), the trial judge. (A former DA) met with my guy and encouraged him not to seek to return to the same force because “next time it may not just be a retaliatory charge.”

How do you feel about Citizen Commissions? Maybe an even number of community members and law enforcement, with a neutral chairman. Take the discipline for claims of serious misconduct out of the chain of command. It would be like an automatic arbitration on all cases where there is a possibility of serious discipline.

That sounds corrupt as hell doesn’t it?

Mixed feelings.

I made reference to my incident where I became a target. Approx two years later I was in a shooting incident. My review board was a mix of citizens and cops (3 citizens, 3 cops, and the division captain). The way this is supposed to work is that the cops on the board will be assigned via a pre determined rotational basis. Last minute they swapped out a supervisor who had been on my side the whole time with one who was the best friend of the Lt I’d turned in. It was blatantly obvious that they were trying to rig the process with the swap and it showed in the hearing as the enemy Sgt was obviously biased the whole time against me. Two of the citizens actually came to my defense against him. I was voted in policy 5-2 (all three citizens and the two rank and file cops voted for me, the Sgt and Captain voted against). The prosecuting attorney later in declining to file charges on me called it one of the most clear cut self defense shootings he’d scene. The 2 votes against me were obvious politics and retaliation.

So my point is that I’m not necessarily against civilians as the civilians on my board did right by me. I’m just against civilians with an obvious agenda being on boards which is whats happening in many places. The citizens on my board had been through civilian police academies, done ride alongs, and had been put through scenario training to give them a taste of what cops go through and the instant decisions we have to make. I’m fine with such citizens being on the boards. That unfortunately isn’t whats happening in many cities where obvious police haters are going on the boards without benefit of experience or training. I’m not going to go in depth as the shooting as I don’t want to doxx myself but I was nearly killed and I was hospitalized with my injuries. I made mistakes but they were due to a lack of training, I absolutely will agree I was undertrained as I know the cop I am today with 24 years experience would have made different choices - that though doesn’t make the other guys actions in trying to kill me any less criminal.

Be more specific. Example. LAPD is about 70 percent minority. The sergeants, Lieutenants, Captains, the chief are minority. As well as the city leadership. What exactly have they built in to their system?

1 Like

That’s an uplifting story! It’s amazing how not only the officer, but neighbors and a man traveling through the area stopped what they were doing to help.

Interestingly enough, the town name, Socorro, translates into Relief:

Yeah. Looks like the actions of these officers constitutes some serious coverage of misconduct built into the system.

I don’t think so.

Thanks for that. I’m glad that the system worked for despite your command working against you.

It’s only considered misconduct by liberal vicious and dangerous anarchist loons who think the police have no rights to protect themselves and the public against specifically and selectively black lawbreakers. There is no systemic war on blacks by law enforcement, that’s nothing more then a liberal lie to incite insurrection, race riots and a race war in the country.

The majority of Americans of all race, color and creed are sick of it!!