Ok, Flame away... But this is so crazy it just might work.

What if LEO's were not paid for court time? Right now in most PD's it is an automatic 4 Hrs of overtime.

My question is simply why not just reimburse them for the time if a guilty plea or a guilty by jury is found? This would amount to a lot less frivolous charges, I believe. "Go to court, tossed out, bad charge... no court pay."

And before the rant on unscrupulous lawers getting the client off and such... If you were a lEO wouldn't you want to be paid for your time and therefore not present unfounded allegations? If a slimy lawer type can worm his way through your case, it prolly wasn't handled to the best of abilities.

And, the other one.. "LEO's are not paid enough. Taking away court time would cripple some folks finacially..." It's like driving a race car... they know the risks. If more pay was the underlying factor... they wouldn't be an enforcer.

For the argument that some Leos would give up and just say screw it... tsk, tsk, they love their job and they believe in it, They would just me more inclined to play by the book.

I know this will be met with some obtuse attitudes, but really, I'm just thinking... any holes you can find I really do want to know.

If they were in it for the money they would work as a mall cop. That is where the bucks are!

Performance based pay for Law Enforcement? Interesting concept. It would never get implemented for the same reason that teacher testing is unpopular. The ones that can't cut it will scream bloody murder to protect their jobs. The bounty hunter mentality would take over and BGs would be in a world of $hit if it is used.

B&E= $500

Auto theft= $500

Armed robbery=$2000

Rape=$5000

Murder=$5000

Drunk drivers=$3000

Speeders and other traffic violations? "Does a burnt out tail light pay as much as a failure to signal? Better call the chief on that one Panch".

damn, first post. You got me. Really. Like I asked. I wonder should I kill this thread now before it is seen too much.... the anti cops will be out in force on this.

Let it run and watch the fireworks.

Hmmmmmm, well let's get the flaming started.  I don't get automatic four hours of overtime but that's a good idea.  You say let's get rid of paying court overtime to police and it will make us play more by the book.  The first hole I can find is that you have problems spelling.  Second, it would  be to ask what in the hell does not paying officers for court overtime have to do with making "us" play more by the book.  Now surely there is some kind of law or rule written somewhere in this country that says you have to pay for overtime.  I think that we have here another idiot that categorizes all Cops on one or two they've dealt with or heard about.  Well sir I don't categorize you because if I did I would say by your spelling problems and this idiot idea of yours that you are from a mobile home park and listen to Kid Rock everyday especially the song that has the line, "I ain't straight outta compton I'm straight out da trailer."

LMAO you guys make me laugh so hard sometimes where do you all come up with this crap.    

We don't get 4 hours OT for court.  Tell me where to sign up for that deal.  If you write bogus charges, the State Attorney is going to have your ass standing tall in front of him or better yet, a judge.  So lets concentrate on some meaningful contribution to society rather than this patently stupid idea.  Note that I said "stupid" versus "ignorant".

[size=4]DAMN SKIPPY![/size=4]

About cops and Bogus charges, I believe that they usually are always "tecnically correct" but sometimes irrational on a lot of their charges.

Case in point:  Couple weeks ago wife is out driving. She gets sick while driving and pulls over to rest. When she continues, she forgets to put seat belt back on and a female cop pulls her over. Now seat belt violations are supposted to be a secondary offence, not a reason for pulling someone over. Cop talks to wife,who is obviously sick, tickets her and suggest she go home and try to get better.

Case #2:  I am out driving (about a year ago) and come upon a stop sign.  I have traveled this road many times before.  I approach a stop sign slowly, stop, and then continue.  Cop pulls me over and tickets me, saying I didn't stop completely because he never saw the car rock backwards!!

So technically, both tickets were legit, but in reality the only purpose they served was to steal money from a citizen. In no way did either of these ticket promote safety in any way!  The motivation of these cops was not to look out for me, but themselves.

By the way, I have been driving for over 20 years with a single accident, and that was my first ticket in over 5 years.

sgtar15

Why not attack the root of the problem and apply a flat rate to all legal proceedings with a prestated bonus paid to the winner. Lawyers have been trying to do this to medicine for years. This might also restore the right to a speedy trial and end alot of the frivilous crap. One would be working so hard to increase ones salary that they would have no time for shinanigans. Would apply mostly to lawsuits but the trickle down effect would be a court system less mired in BS lawsuits. Bye bye 33% plus expenses. Divorce ? $1500.00, Slip and fall ? $500.00, Mental trauma ? nada damn thing.

Early Chow...

They limited lawyer's fees in worker's comp cases and all that did was increase the incentive to carry a much larger caseload.  I can't say whether it has reduced the amount of worker's comp. cases, but it sure has reduced the quality of representation each individual worker receives.  

As to the original suggestion, I think you're imagining a problem that doesn't exist.  Therefore, your solution is not necessary.  Do you really think there's some vast conspiracy to frame the innocent, pursue unfounded charges, or otherwise work so hard to screw the general public?  Reminds me of Johnny Cochran's OJ defense- all these cops risked their whole lives and careers in a conspiracy to fram OJ just to "put the black man down".  Sure!

Crime would SKYROCKET! Cops do alot more than write tickets to people that have their head up their ass. They answer burglar alarms, patrol, and go to the domestics at MCUZI'S house. So, not paying them for court except for convictions will just take motivation from the good cops. They get paid the same with tunnel vision ("Hear no EVIL , See no EVIL"), than if they go out and harass thugs.[-!-!-]

The best theory IMO is that police live and work in the same community.  This way they have a vested interest [b]and[/b]empathy with the neighborhood.  Same would go for teachers.  That's about all the idealism I can muster for today.

No matter how good an officer's case may be, it is up to the PROSECUTOR to prove it up. Too much good police work falls through the cracks because of this.

What a great idea.....Here are some other sugestions that you might want to consider while your at it....lets stop paying teachers until they have 100% passing grades from each student, not pay the armed services until there is a war, and while were at it, lets just do away with law enforcement  and ask the U.N to send their Blue beret crew to enforce laws....forget Gore in 2004..Poppinfresh has my vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I get paid absolutely nothing regardless of what I have to do for the Sheriffs Department.

Ian (Reserve Deputy)

... OR, how 'bout we go way, way back to the old days when there was just a county sherif?  If there were any special circumstances that the sherif couldn't handle alone, they'd put together a posse.  The people (generally) "policed" themselves.

just my $0.02

Jadams, First - I can't believe you are so petty... two mispleeled wourds and he's on the soapbox. Ack. Tell you what--you ignore my fat fingers on the keyboard and I'll ignore your poor grammar and sentance structure.

As for the question of why would it help to make LE play by the book a little more... I thought I was clear enough. After re-reading the first post, I can see that I could clarify a bit more.

What I am asking is simple. Why not only pay officers for court time (does not neccessarily have to be OT) in which a guilty plea or verdict (or no-contest)is received for their case. If the officer doesn't think it would stand up in court he may be less inclined to issue something that may not hold up (He/she would be wasting their own time as a witness). This is instead of the "I've done my job, let the prosecutor do the rest" mentality.

This obviously would not be practiced in felony type situations, but anything misdemeanor 2 and below to include traffic and safety.

As for crime sky-rocketing and the "see no evil" suggestion... As I said before, that most likely would not be the case. You guys are doing what you want to do, it's definitely not for the money. What does an average LEO with 3-10 years of road time get paid now? 45-65k?

I probably should have killed this post off early on -- but, oh well. I'll take my medicine. This is not because of a couple of bad incidents with LE. Every ticket I received was deserved (habitual speeding). Most cases the officer was courteous and professional.

As for the purpose of my post, it's just a thought. You cannot argue that there is an increasing negative sentiment from the public towards LE. Do you think people have just decided "well, bob...I'm bored. Let's talk to all our friends and find someone new to dislike" I would guess there are underlying reasons as to the progressing mentality.

Reality Check:  Cops would never agree to a contract that would not pay them for non-convictions in court, and they would strike.

Yep... LE friends of mine don't get automatic 4 hours of overtime either.... but they DO get at least half a day of "on duty" time for a court appearance.

In Hawaii, the legislature is currently discussing a state law that would give the arresting officer a bonus of $100 for each DUI arrest resulting in a conviction or guilty plea.

I don't get 4 hours of pay unless I'm IN court for four hours. It's straight time if it's my regular shift, OT if it's not.
Your theory sucks pal.You are working on the assumption that somehow officers are arresting people simply to get OT. Since only about 1 % of my court cases require my attendance, thats a pretty small return. Counting all cases, I might spend around 2 hours every other week in court during my busiest times. Also, I have to be paid for any work I put in. You cannot require me to volunteer my time, which is what your no-pay plan would do.
 I cannot help it if a jury were to let a defendant go for some reason. Their decision should have no bearing on whether I get paid.
 Any Accusatory Instrument or traffic ticket I sign has a declaration about being signed or attested to under penalty of perjury. I have never taken that statement lightly, and I know my coworkers feel the same way. It's not worth losing your job and getting jail time to falsify statements.
Sgtar:
Reference your wife and the other incident. Technically, as you stated, both are correct. My state doesn't have the "secondary offense" concept; we can stop for anything. If your wife wanted to contest the ticket, the place to do so would have been in the Court. People make excuses all the time when they are stopped; your wife may not have appeared sufficiently ill to be believable.  And really, thats no excuse for not buckling up.  As for your incident, did you come to a complete stop? No? Then you broke the law. Fight it in court. I see people run stop signs all the time who claim the stopped. I've almost been T boned by some of those idiots. STOP means the wheels stop turning, no forward momentum. Nothing less.  We make no money off the tickets, so stop making that claim. I'm tired of the 70 year old geezers who say "I've been driving for 50 years without a ticket". I like to say, "well, that means you haven't been caught". People who've been driving long periods of time are the most complacent and most likely to start getting lazy and cutting corners as far as the rules of the road.
Nightstalker: in my state, any sheriff's deputy is required to live in the county they are employed in. I cannot speak for other states.
mpthole; thats unworkable. We are the primary LE agency in our county for the townships with no police force (about half the county). Who will those residents turn to for protection with a limited force of just the Sheriff himself? Obviously you have no idea what the call load of a Sheriff's Office is like.
 Amish: we are not allowed to strike.

foor court I get a four hour block of on call pay, which is 1/4 of my hourly rate. I just have to sit by the phone and be able to get to the court house within one hour.
We went to this system becuase 90% plus of defendants plead guilty and the officers testimony is rarely needed.

TCSD, I should have stopped reading your post after 4 lines. As I gather you did with mine, go back and spend a minute to read it all, you will find your contrbution completely off kilter then.

No severe flame intended to you, but if you want to have a debate... you should do better than quote someone else. She was ill, she did not have to be cited... I have been ill and not required an ambulance. It's a valid reason. You ever go a little over because a pants-shit*ing is eminent?  (God I have been close, but that's a different story)

You are the people I am asking. Your opinion, this guys opinion, that guys opinion, Take some stress out on a co-worker and just relax at home. Geez.

If you read my last post, which you did not. You will see it is not about cops paying their days with OT. Really, read it. THE QUESTION:

If my idea were to become a policy...would you quit? Would that really be a deciding factor? Your move...

1% of your citations require attendance? Must be a small PD (with out-of-state traffic)... you are the exception and I applaud that they are already using my idea to curb the amounts the public pays for the driving tax.

Why can no one carry a non confrontational conversation. Those of you who are LE would you respond this way if I ran into you in the mall and asked? Most likely, no.

And they wonder...? "why does the public have that attitude?" answer= "they just don't know how it is out there, we have to be tough." Bullsh*t.

At first I felt bad for posting this. Now, I feel damn good. The representitives of law enforcement are showing their colors. Every person on the opposition has taken the opportunity to ridicule my idea. Instead of saying " that is likely not a good idea, because......" I get the sh*t beat out of me because it encroaches their CHOICE of occupation. (occupation almost a key word here)

I started off friendly and on the fence... review the posts. Now I am greeted with the arrogant ramblings of SOME le representitives.

Yeah... the public [i][blue]loves[/i][/blue] LE, my bad. Let this thread die, I am disgusted. [puke]

p.s. Another thread today about general abuse of power... [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=9014[/url]... Guess I'm not the only one noticing severe flaws.

Pop:
If you read my post (yes, I read yours), you'll see I'm not talking to YOU when I reference the "I'm sick" excuse. You'd be amused to see the number and type of excuses I get when folks try to get out of tickets. I always conduct a question and answer session after I stop someone, using a set of questions I've found will eliminate the most common excuses Defendants will use if the case goes to trial. I've seen threads about that in the past too , i.e. "why does the officer grill me when he stops me, that's violating my rights, man!".  I feel I am fairly sensitive to the imminent emergencies, so to speak, of the public. Of the people I stop, a third or so get a warning. Some days thats one in three, some days everyone gets a warning. Some days everyone gets a ticket. Thats the way it works out.
 On the subject of tickets, this is a thread that might interest you at one of my other boards; a lot of people are their own worst enemy when it comes to the officer deciding if a ticket gets written or not:
[URL]http://www.officer.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000469.html[/URL]
 A small PD? I guess that depends on your view of what small is. My county has 100K homegrown citizens, plus at least another another 50 K or so of student population. I don't keep track of the enrollment figures for the three colleges, so I couldn't say for sure.It's big enough that I can keep busy most nights.
Rather than getting "defensive", I am simply trying to set your apparently mistaken views straight with a little real world information. I love people like who who make inflammatory posts and then when confronted with reality go" geez, lighten up, I'm a) only joking b)expressing MY viewpoint" or some other lame excuse. It boils down to the fact that you are  posting a flame subject and hate being corrected on the matter. You are, bottom line, insinuating that officers  make false arrests simply to get paid to go to court, and that if we weren't paid for cases we lose, we'd tighten up our arrests to only what you seem to think would be more legitimate arrests. You need to be corrected on that insulting concept.
  Believe me, I relax when I get home. When I'm on the Job, it's business. I owe the people who pay my salary my fullest effort  to go out there and answer calls and try to impact on some of the lame drivers behind the wheel. That means tickets for those I feel deserve it.A lot of people feel that everyone but themselves are lousy drivers.
Your question about quitting is nonsensical. Such a policy would never happen. Law requires workers to be paid for their labor. Unless you fall into certain salaried positions which don't allow OT, usually admin types.
  Your initial post was anything BUT friendly.
 Your initial theory about arrests also states that officers might be less inclined to make arrests which "don't stand up". You ignore that in several situations, officers are REQUIRED to arrest. We have no option. In others, we make arrests based on the statements of witnesses and victims. I would  run the risk of lawsuits from victims for NOT making an arrest in many cases. We cannot regulate the decisions of jurors or even the decisions of District Attorneys in how they prosecute a case. There are many reasons why a case might die in the pipeline of prosecution or even in front of a jury.   As I have said, we make arrests under penalty of perjury. If there is some sort of gross negligence in the manner in which we made an arrest, we could lose our j

Pop
My last post made me think of my last trial and my next trial, both of which happen to be V & T trials. In the last one, I wrote a woman for following too closely after she rear-ended someone. She claimed at the scene and at the trial that in the 35 MPH zone she was in, she saw the car ahead of her from 200 yards away, tried to stop and slid into the rear of the car. Now, never mind that there wasn't a 200 yard line of sight,but  a 200 yard skid would have required a pre-accident speed of   over 100 MPH.
In my next trial, I have a school bus driver who complained that a car passed her school bus while the reds were on. I obtained a statement and issued a ticket for same. Now maybe according to your little theory I shouldn't have written a ticket for either case because I should have looked into the crystal ball my agency installed on my dash and thought "hhhmmm.. I wont write these tickets because I might not get paid for court time if the Defendant decides to take this to court and wins". Yeah, right.

Poor grammer...hehehe!!!!!!!!

Poppin...do you think it would honestly be fair to only pay officers for a guilty plea, verdict, or no contest.  The way the county JP courts, I write citations out of, work is simple.  They have such a heavy caseload that they plea almost everything out to deferred ajudication(I know that's spelled wrong).  So is it realistic and fair to say that because the asst. da's plea almost every case out to lighten the workload for the court that I don't get paid.  I work night shift and the JP courts have trial at 9am in the mornings and that's when I've just gone to sleep.  So instead of getting the sleep I need I've got to stay up and then go to court and because the ADA plead out the case I wouldn't get paid.  That thought itself is ridiculous.   As for the citations I write are all of good cause but, of course, I'm the judge of that.  

There has always been a negative sentiment from people towards LE.  The truth in that matter is you always hear about the bad things but hardly ever hear about the good things we do.  

Three year LEO's with roadtime get paid $45-$65k...where is this???  I need to come work there.  I work for one of the largest and most populated counties in Texas and after three years I'm not even making $37k/year.  

As for my rude tone I don't want to be rude to anyone on here.  But the way you wrote this topic it sounds like a generalization of most police officers and I hate that.  

I would think that with all the problems we have with gangs, drugs, murders and a few other problems it would be quite simple to find something more important to do than ticket someone who chooses not to wear a seatbelt,or a kid who crosses the highway on his four wheeler,
     Have a nice day