Should those hired to protect us be treated any different than a common criminal?

Just like any other criminal. Plus blackballed from any LEO job.

Prosecute him like anyone else. Sentencing might be even worse for him since he was trusted to protect people.

He goes to jail. No exceptions.

Pedophile and Cop!?!

Might want to send him straight to solitary (if convicted).

On the contrary, @cookieman, send him straight to General Population.

“Should those hired to protect us be treated any different than a common criminal?”

Yes. They should be held to an even higher standard, thus the punishments should be more severe. If those entrusted to enforce the law cannot themselves adhere to the law then the law has no meaning.

@canidmajor: Yes. He’ll last maybe a week. But I suspect that’s your point.

Yes, very much so. But also, they should not be assumed to be bad guys when they aren’t.

@cookieman yes, zackly that.

I wouldn’t want to be a child molesting LEO going to prison.
I think he should be held to a higher standard than the average criminal. Although he was caught red handed, I bet he gets a free pass. Cops don’t put cops in prison even when they deserve it.

He and his colleagues need to have their testicles removed.

@kritiper IF he wasn’t guilty, WHY did he set up the meeting & then show up to finish the deal??? They knew it was him when they set up a meeting. He shows up IN uniform & IN his patrol car ready to meet the underage girl with whom he had arranged to have sex. In my mind, that makes him one of the “bad guys”!!!

LEOs can lie for each other, but if they’re caught, and there is clear, undeniable evidence, there’s nothing to protect them.

He’s REALLY ducked himself. He’ll likely spend his entire sentence, in solitary. I’d probably rather die.

“LEOs can lie for each other, but if they’re caught, and there is clear, undeniable evidence, there’s nothing to protect them.”
That is when complicit DAs, biased judges, and manipulated juries take over.
The blue code of silence has many levels.

This is a child/sex thing. It’s highly doubtful, that he will get any level of special treatment.

@LadyMarissa The main question doesn’t differentiate between “him” and every other cop on the beat.

@kritiper the provided link does. His own department busted his ass while in the act of attempting to meet a 13 y/o girl. The article says 13–15. The local report said 13. On top of that, there were 12 different police departments involved in the sting & he was a member of 1 of them. I’m hoping that since they took the time to specifically bust him, that they will take the time to be sure to convict him!!!

@LadyMarissa The main body of your question didn’t address that. The main question seems to be about all policemen in general and not just the one. (I didn’t investigate the link because it takes too long to download and I haven’t got all day to sit here and wait for it.)

Maybe you shouldn’t have an opinion when you’re too lazy to spend the time to know what opinion you do have!!! ALL the required info was available. I’m sorry you see Fluther as a waste of your time.

I thought it was a good question…. Phrased just like it was…

He should be tried and punished just like any criminal. If he used his position as a LEO, then the sentence should be even more harsh.

I doubt that the sentence will be what people expect. Largely because of the fact, there was no actual act, other than that the LEO “tried” to commit the crime. If he has a good lawyer, charges might be dropped all together.
A lot depends on how the operation went down, and how other procedures were adhered to. If someone wrote the the wrong date, on even one page of his arrest documents, the charges could be nullified. That’s our “justice” system, at work. A lot, will have to go right, to disprove entrapment, and other legal BS….

@LadyMarissa You assume a great deal! I look forward with anticipation to your future questions!

How childish!!!

And here is 2 pigs walking away free after raping an 18 year old:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49522500

^ No matter how bad they become, cops don’t turn on cops!

They do “turn” on each other. It just doesn’t get press… And I will agree, that it’s anomalous.

I can’t remember the details of this specific incident, but several years ago, a man was shot in the back while laying face down, in front of a crowded subway car. There were several cops around him. They should have IMMEDIATELY trained their weapons on that officer, and placed him under arrest…

Wasn’t there an incident a few years back near where you live where a SC LEO shot an unarmed man 8 times & then tried to cover up what really happened??? I seem to remember hearing every excuse in the book until a vid of what actually happened suddenly appeared. That’s when the LEO was finally prosecuted for murder. Did he ever go to jail???

If it’s the incident where the cop shot the fleeing man on the back, yes. I don’t recall the precise charge. But, he will be/is imprisoned.

Shit, I had to go look this up. Yes, he was fleeing and he was a really dangerous man. He had no gun, a burned out tail light, and he didn’t believe in paying child support. I guess that warrants 8 bullets in the back plus staging the scene after the murder when you realize what you’ve done. I get the feeling that you’re a LEO and you’re proving what I said.

Former LEO… Yes, I was.

The incident, to which you are referring, also took place close to a busy intersection. Violating not only LEO guidelines, but firearms 101. “Be sure of your target, AND what is beyond it.” The officer could have injured, or killed multiple other people,with his actions.
I hope he has fun in prison. I wager he will spend most of his time, in solitary confinement. He wouldn’t be making many friends, in general population… He will pay a heavy price, for his behavior. At least he’s off of the streets. My assessment of his personality type, is that he probably wanted to kill someone. Cop, or not, he may have eventually become a serial killer, or something like that…

As I’ve stated before, on other threads, this is a symptom of not having enough qualified people applying for a job as a LEO, and his department having to hire people who have no business in that field, because they need to have enough officers to fulfill the required number of LEOs, in that jurisdiction. IMO, that is the main variable, in most cases like this… If you have to hire 10 new LEOs, 20 apply, but only 4 seem fitted for the job, you have to hire 10 people who may not all be qualified (for one reason or another.)

There was a case once, where a traffic control officer stopped another cop for speeding after a lengthy chase.
She was later bullied off the force and got death threats from her “fellow officers”.

There are undoubtedly, many such stories.

With cameras, pretty much everywhere now, more is being exposed. I think having body cams, also helps deter undesirable behavior of the LEOs wearing them…

I’d like to see cameras attached to each armed officer’s weapons, as well…

@MrGrimm888 I like the idea of a camera on their guns as well. Due to where I live, I get a lot of my news out of Greenville SC. The LEO’s there are required to wear a camera. Yet it seems that every time something shady happens, the camera accidently wasn’t turned on. Now the head of the department says they will continue to record but will NOT supply the press with copies of what happened as it is nobody’s business. Still, I’ve noticed that when it shows the officer acted appropriately that he has it showing on the news that night. Makes me wonder what he’s afraid will happen with the others. I’ve always assumed that the officer was just doing his/her duty; however now when he refuses to provide, it makes me wonder what the officer did wrong!!! I feel that when an officer turns off his camera on purpose that he/she should automatically be considered guilty much like I’m automatically considered guilty IF I refuse to take the roadside breathalyzer. To me, it’s the same thing!!! IF the officer is doing nothing wrong, WHY hide it???

Most LEOs I know, hated the cameras, at first. But love them now. It helps prevent people from lying about the officers conduct, more often than exposing bad behavior. I would have gladly worn one. But it has only recently become mandatory. I left law enforcement in May 2018. We were not provided body cams, at that time. Although several departments had only recently been made to wear them.

To my knowledge, it is not possible, for the officer, to turn off the camera… But it can easily be obstructed, during a close contact situation, or it can become dislodged, in a confrontation. Overall monitoring, of behavior is good. But it’s the guns that need a camera the most, in my opinion.

At this point, for instance, if multiple officers fire on a person, ballistics tests are required to determine who actually hit the person. That only provides minimum information though. It cannot indicate the variables leading up to the reason for discharging the firearm. Plus, people fire handguns, with both arms extended. One for the dominant hand, which pulls the trigger, and the other hand is placed under the grip, for accuracy, and control of muzzle rise. This will frequently block a chest mounted camera’s view, of a very important part of an officer involved shooting… A camera placed under the barrel, would show much more, and would be pretty much free of any obstruction of view.
Many falsified reports, of wrongful shootings, claim that the assailant was an imminent threat (holding a knife, or gun etc.) A camera on the gun, could prove, or disprove that, with much greater reliability, than a chest mounted one.