Botched investigation of Dorjils was "routine" insider said

I am sitting on information right now.

Patience, patience. Thanks.

Robert Rogers

I wish you could print what you know Robert...remember that officers cannot be disciplined if the investigation goes past the one year mark under the Police Officers Bill of Rights!

Robert:
You are a tease. You are going to make us wait til Friday, aren't you?

Doesn't anyone know that Richard Lawhead, President of the Police Union led this raid. Weren't their allegations of people being iced during this raid? Why do you think it took more than a year, deal to protect Lawhead? What about cops getting free drinks at Carlos Obrien's after work, swept under the carpet because of Lawhead. Gratuities from Denny's, Gratuities from the Mexico (discount meals PD Green/ Pd Red.) Where are you on this Robert?

while you guys are playing these "i know something you don't know" games, here's a bit o' reality...
frequently, the citizens of san bernardino refuse to talk to the police even when they are truly victims. Obviously this can hamper an investigation, even one with the best intentions. Within the community, this is a common practice.

as for allowing an investigation to progress past the one year time frame....an officer may not get any discipline, but he has no real recourse for defending his reputation, either. If an allegation against an officer is sustained that's put in his personnel file. That information is accessible by criminal defense lawyers in what's called a "pitchess motion" which can be used to discredit an officer in court. Still the officer has no recourse.
So, letting an investigation drag on beyond a year does no one any good.

To sick and tired,

Not playing any games here. I am keeping an eye on public officials.

My eye was on Chief Michael Billdt and Mayor Pat Morris when they told a crowd of dozens of Dorjils residents at a public meeting that they would conduct a full investigation and hold officers accountable. I watched and listened with my own eyes and ears.

They did not complete an investigation. They did not keep their promise.

When I asked why, they blamed the community's non-cooperation.

Obviously, a civic leader has no business promising something, not delivering, and then blaming those to whom they made the promise.

We have held the chief and mayor accountable for their statements and actions on this one.

Robert Rogers

to L. Heart...

No, you idiot. It wasn't Rich Lawhead who was accused of the "ice" issues, it was Sgt. Lawrence. LAWHEAD....not LAWRENCE. I know it's close, but they are not the same people.

As for gratuities at the Mexico....the "PD red or green" is a smaller meal than other menu items. It consists of rice and beans and beef or pork meat...nothing else. Except for tortillas. The current cost is about $5.00, which has gone up from the $2.75 when I first began working for the city. So, if the price keeps going up and it's not a typical menu item how can you call it a gratuity? I guess the tortillas must be the gratuity you refer to.

AS for the Carlos O'Brien's issue, I don't have any facts about that, so I won't comment. Since, you obviously haven't researched you information, you should probably shut up and go back to your corner.

Former officer Steven Peach has been trying to get people to listen to how crooked SBPD is for YEARS!!!

Mr. Rogers

I appreciate your response and your apparent diligence in disclosing the truth. I absolutely agree with holding people in positions of authority accountable. Please don't allow political manuevering to deter you from your course. More efforts are expended trying to minimize issues that should be dealt with honestly and with integrity. The community has a right to know. However, I question whether or not your motivation is to perpetuate the drama and sell newspapers or uncover public corruption.

It appears to me that the promises that Mayor Morris and Chief Billdt made, were made to blow smoke up the asses of the westside residents. However, if they take no action to help heal themselves, shame on them.

The police are not the answer to the communities problems. They are one aspect of a civil society. If the members of society have no respect for each other, law and order, or community commitment, the police are nothing more than a reactionary force. It's easy to point fingers at someone other than yourself when you are dissatisfied with your situation.

STEVEN PEACH????????

He's a f---ing nut! The department tried to kill me because I'm an athiest???? Please!

Shan,

Steve Peach was fired for dating a crack whore from Baseline Avenue. Now who exactly should be listening to him? Now Billdt may be a failed leader, but that doesn't make Peach a credible source of information. If Billdt had anything to do with his termination that would be a feather in his cap.

I erred in my response to L. Heart. To clarify, Lawrence was responsible for putting people on "ice" not Lawhead.

See, I was wrong....I admitted it....I corrected it... and now I can move on. It's not that hard. Mayor Morris and Chief Billdt should admit they were wrong, correct it and put their egos aside so the city can move on.

Sick and tired,

Thanks for your temperate and well-reasoned reply.

I think we are on the same page.

As for my motivations, I can tell you that selling newspapers is not something I, personally, think about. I do think about what issues people want to read about and what information they need to make democratic decisions in their community.

Maybe with time you'll trust that I am not motivated by sales or profits. I make a humble salary that does not rise or fall based on our newspaper's circulation. I would catch less flak if I wrote about less consequential issues.

But I got into this racket because I believe in free speech and the public's right and duty to be informed. As a reader and a voter, that's what I always wanted. As a journalist, that's what I strive to provide.

Thanks again,

Robert Rogers

Hey Robert-- Why is it that someone speaks on Billdt's behalf during crisis situations when it is highly appropriate for the chief to be the person giving the statement??? This Dorjils incident must not be a priority for him if he's MIA for comments. Oh yeah, he's got 9-10 other crises he's dealing with. one of them is fighting to keep his job.

And to place blame on the citizens for the 1 year delay, wow, talk about accountability & responsibilty...So on a more serious crime like a homicide, if the citizens don't cooperate, SBPD will just wait around to solve it until they do decide to cooperate? What an effective way to conduct police investigations. Incredible.

All police investigations require community involvement. Look at gang related murders, how many of them are solved? Everyone that is there and sees what happens either disappears or says "I didn't see nothing" when the cops get there. With out the community involvement crimes or internal investigations don't get solved

B.S. is full of B.S. the PD green/red is only for police officers so you must be a police officer to have gotten it. If so you are guilty of taking gratuties. It is certainly an off menu item only offered to police at a reduced price. So are many of the discounts officers receive and ask for (MAYBE EVEN DEMAND? LIKE CASTAWAYS)around town. If your way to debate is "shut up and go to your corner" you must also be a police officer who does not believe in people's contitutional rights. We should be afraid of you a man with a gun and authority with your attitude would certainly abuse it, sounds like you might even be Lawhead. You are not very smart or don't pay attention I know that Lawrence was accused of icing people (I read the paper) but Lawhead led a raid where citizens alleged that they were taken out of their neighborhood held in a car in a parking lot and threatened by police while they tried to find something on them. This happened over a year ago before Lawrence so that policy must have been going on then, and the head of union must have know about it.

As the former wife of a SBPD officer I know first hand the way these officers use their badge and their power to get away with all kids of stuff, so when claims are made about the department being corrupt I don't doubt them a bit. I know that there's more to the Peach sitaution then the public knows, as well.

To L. heart-
Do you know the definition of gratuity? I would guess not...the only fact you seem to have correct is that the P.D. plate is for law enforcement. When a person has a meal prepared for them and they pay the set price on the bill (which is not adjusted) for the meal they received it is NOT a gratuity! Let me help you with the big words...according to Websters Dictionary a gratuity is "a gift as of money, esp. for a service; tip". Now clearly paying for a meal that has been prepared for you, you have eaten and then PAID for is not a gratuity! I'm sure this upsets you....

This is to any and all readers who wish to weigh in ...

I had never before heard this information about there possibly being "special" menu items for law enforcement at a local restaurant.

Let's say hypothetically (since I don't know the facts in this particular case), a local restaurant is in business.

It serves customers from all walks of life from the same menu with the same prices.

But, let's say, there are special items exclusively for law enforcement. Let's say those items are discounted from the items available to the general public.

That strikes me as a favor, handout, discount, etc. to a public servant. We have strict rules in American democracy against unreported monetary favors for public servants and elected officials, and for good reason - we don't want people and businesses currying favor, and when they do (thru donations) the public has a right to know about each dollar.

Again, I don't know what is going on at the local diner. I am merely thinking through these implications.

Any thoughts?

Robert Rogers

One more thought ...

The key here is whether Joe or Jane Sixpack can walk into the restaurant and order the "P.D. Plate" and be served for the same price.

If not, we may have a problem.

Robert Rogers

People, let's refocus here! Why isn't this a headline storY?

Anyone who owns their own restaurant business has the right to provide free meals or meals at a discounted price to whomever they choose. It is THEIR business, after all. If the owners of a restaurant offer to give you a discount on your bill, would you turn it down? How dare you try to tell private business owners how to run their business! Would you go up to someone in the grocery store and tell them what to buy or interrupt someone making a transaction with a bank teller to tell them what they should do with their money?

Let's put this Mexico red/green PD meal in perspective, shall we? These are not legislators being bought off with a $500-a-plate meal, this is a $5 plate for the men and women who protect our cities. What an incredibly petty complaint!

And just to clarify, I am not a police officer or affiliated in any way with the police union, I am the wife of someone who works in the restaurant business, NOT an owner.

Let me clarify a few things that have been blogged above:

Steve Peach was terminated for being untruthful in an Internal Affairs investigation. That is a fact. No conspiracy! Just a lawful termination. The department and city are much safer without him. Whatever he blogs is a lie. Period!

Now, regards to Internal Affairs (IA) investigations:

Often, the community does offer help with these investigations, but unfortunatley a lot of information they provide is often not true (national statistics support this). However, the Dorjil investigation could have easily been completed within a year with limited assistance from the community. At the completion of the investigation, a disposition would have been given by the administration (such as: sustained, not sustained, exonerated, unfounded, etc).

For reasons only known to Chief Billdt and his inner circle, the administration failed to investigate it in a timely manner. What a discrace to our department and the Dorjil residents! Why did Chief Billdt allow this to happen? Don't blame IA for they are directed by Chief Billdt to work cases in order of priority. I guess the Dorjil investigation wasn't a priority to the Chief? Or was he trying to hide something or to protect his favorite officers? Again we see selective investigations directed by the chief (Brad Lawrence ring a bell?).

I know some of you are probably thinking that Assistant Chief Walt Goggin is the direct chain of command for IA and that all IA investigations go through him. Some do; some don't (or at least he is directed by Billdt on what to do). Chief Goggin, we know you are in a no win situation here. Our complaint is not against you.

Closed door meeting:

This evening Chief Billdt had a closed door meeting with the mayor and council regarding recent police association allegations coupled with a vote of no confidence against Billdt. Did you know that Chief Billdt brought along Lt. Boom and Lt. Harp with him in order to provide a rebutal to the associations allegations? Did you know that Billdt intentionally failed to notify anyone else in the management association about this? Why? That's a clear vote of no confidence in his managers! Did he actually think that Boom (the center of most controversies) would help his cause? Cheif Billdt has a deep connection with Steve Peach: they are both pathological lyers! I hope the council saw through the deception this evening.

Council members: your police department and community have spoken loud and clear for you to act. I know that the mayor makes the ultimate decision regarding the chief's career. Put pressure on him to act now and remove Chief Billdt! Wendy, Ricki, Esther and others are you listening? We want action now! Mr. Penman, your can influence others to action like no one else I have seen before. Work your magic! I would address the mayor but recent Sun articles confirm his refusal to take any action other than to seek an outside consulting firm to determine what the real problem is (your kidding us right?).

Citizens of our city: are you fed up yet? Demand action from your council members and mayor. They listen to you more than you realize!

To the anonymous defender of special prices for PD,

If I had a nickel for every time someone remarked "how dare you" to my questions, I'd be a rich man.

Yes, I dare to question anyone and anything.

Take your basic premise: That private business can do whatever they want, serve whomever they want, charge any way they want.

You are right, to an extent. They can't discrimminate against groups. Favoring certain groups walks a fine line toward discrimmination of non-favored groups.

You can probably see how the "private business" argument was used regularly by those who didn't want to serve blacks in the south during the Jim Crow era.

The simple fact is that officers cannot accept money or monetary favors while on duty. If on-duty officers receive discounts on food that the general public cannot, then that logically looks like a favor (with monetary value), thus it would be unethical.

It may also be illegal.

No need to attack me or suggest that I'm insolent for "daring" to question something. The fact is that the behavior you have described may very well violate department policy and the law. I have no idea if it is occurring, as I stated earlier.

Robert Rogers

To Ex wife:
Hmmmmmmmmm EX-WIFE?????...well that says it all!

Dear Megan;

Yes, I am better off without him! Thank you! It was only after he began to physically abuse me that I was able to find help and escape a nightmarish 8 year long marriage. The divorce ate among police officers is about 75%!

Robert,

The "PD green" and "PD red plates" go back to the 1950s when cops walked the beat, ran into the Mexico Cafe on Mt. Vernon Avenue and ordered the PD green or PD red BURRITO (depending on whether the flatfoot wanted red or green sauce) and ran back out the door to get back on the beat.

Sharon Gaitan Blechinger's grandmother owned the restauant in the 1950 s and she started the practice.

Later in the late 1960 s and on through the years, Art Gaitan, one of San Bernardino's truly great restaurant entrepreneurs, continued the practice for the cops who kept having their meals interrupted by a radio call and had to run back to their squad cars to answer those calls (that still happens today.)

Art expanded the sales of the PD red and the PD Green were expanded to all law enforcement officers, all of whom were low-paid in those days: city cops, deputy sheriff's, highway patrol, etc. To all who continued to grab the quick bite on their short lunch/dinner breaks and still run out the door leaving behind a half-eaten meal when they got a duty call.

In 2008, the PD red and PD green buritto (depending on whether a cop wants red sauce or green sauce) continues as it evolved over the years to be pretty much the same:

A CHILDREN'S PORTION/SIZED red or green burrito that may be purchased by any police officer, deputy sheriff, and today, FIREFIGHTERS who also get the quick dispatch while at the table, especilly the paramedics.

Fact: This practice breaks no law, nor any department policy. The recipient gets what he pays for, a child's plate at child's plate prices.

Fact: Many other restaurants in town, although they may not advertise it do the same thing(and most will now probably deny it due to the unfortunate, comment - on a subject not yet fullly-researched - about "favor, handout, discount,etc. to a public servant.")

Fact: When Joe sixpack puts on a bullet-proof vest to go to work, runs into a burning building to save your life, a loved ones life (including the family pet), when Joe Sixpack goes through four consecutive work shifts and never once gets to finish his meal without being interrupted by a radio call, when Joe Sixpack has to take a recess from munching on his burrito to escort the drunk out of the restaurant, answer the questions and complaints of fellow diners and explain to them why he is "in here enjoying his food at the taxpayers expense while crime is running rampant outside," when Joe Sixpack has his meal interrupted by the nice elderly lady begging the officer/deputy/patrolman/firefighter/paramedic to "please, please, please come and help me right now, my cat won't get out of the tree next door," when Joe sixpack spots a begger going table to table bothering customers and breaking the law, or when a suspicious duo walk-in like they're casing the place and the officer jumps to duty like they've been trained to do, when Joe Sixpack is willing to put on a uniform and share that life, then maybe he ought to be able to buy a PD red, or a PD green for five bucks and enjoy a few bites of a childs' plate-sized meal.

By the way, most of our uniformed men and women still forgo the PD red or the PD green in favor of paying full fare for a full-sized meal, even if they don't get to finish all of it it.

AND, since when does a private restaurant that gives up their profits several times a year to raise money for the canine program, the free children's dental service sponsored by the Assistance League of San Bernardino, and many other good charities (have you ever been to a restaurant like the Mexico when the cops/firefighters etc. are working as waiters and they get to keep the tips, plus a generous donations of the entire day's profits on occassion, so they can help buy a new bed for the burn unit or buy a police dog for rescue/drug detection/etc. service)have to apologize for how much they charge cops for their meals?

A private restauant isn't a tax-run operation and as long as they don't discriminate based on sex, color, race, etc. they can serve whoever they want and kickout whoever they want including politicians who demand that other paying customers be evicted so they and their cronies can have the choice seats.

Does the Mexico Restaurant ever allow fundraisers for elected officials like me? ABSOLUTELY, just like most other restaurants in town they are happy to have politicos spend, spend, and spend, their money at the restaurant bar during those events.

Thank you Mexico Cafe, The Mug, D.J.s Coffee Shop, Le Rendezvous Restaurant, The Gourmet, Mollys, Castaways, Alfredos, Chilis, Albertos Mexican Food, California Pizza Kitchen, Elephant Bar, El Pollo Loco, Home Town Buffet, Jose's Mexican Food, Margarita Beach, Marie Callender's, Mitla Cafe, Nena's, Nice Buns and Subs, Outback Steakhouse, Papa Tony's Diner, Pat and Oscar's, Rays Downtown Deli, Rosa Maria's, Sizzler, Sundowners Family Restaurant,the Red Fox, the Souper Grinder, Wong's Kitchen, the Yum Yum Restaurant and many more. (No, when Robert Rogers calls you, the law doesn't require you to admit to any of the "specials" you provide out of your gratitude for the men and women who keep your businesses and customers safe.)

Please, keep serving your great food, keep supporting our town's charities and keep being the WONDERFUL PRIVATE BUSINESS you are, with all the taxes, inspections, regulations and the financial risks you take, (especially in these tough times) to stay in business and give us a safe place to enjoy a meal. We still love you and our cops, firefighters, deputies, highway patrol and everyone else who protects us.

By the way Roger, do you know the Mexico Cafe gives free meals to OUR military personnel just returned from Iraq and Afghanistan?

Maybe the Sun should look into that, I can see the headline now: "MEXICO CAFE GIVES FREE MEALS TO GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES," (and, no less, to employees of the government agency that hires the most people, and has the biggest budget, the Department of Defense, aka. the United States Armed Forces.)

There must be SOMETHING wrong with "PUBLIC SERVANTS" getting that kind of a FREEBEE.

Please forgive my sarcasm Robert, but this "issue," in my humble opinon, is way over the top.

Jim Penman

Robert:

I have an experience to share. There was once a time that I was the fleet manager for a car dealership in this area. I was going over marketing plans and thought of my local police department. I called them up and asked if it were legal to do special pricing for them, as I did not know if it was legal. The officer I spoke with said they appreciated the gesture, but stated that it would not be lawful. I did get a few cops that wandered into my dealership and they wouldn't even give their occupation up before the credit check was done and the deal was pretty much made. Later, they would always smile and say they just didn't want special treatment. If they had the opportunity to lie to me, saying it was okay, save a few THOUSAND dollars without consequence and not worry about it, then I doubt they'd haggle over a few bucks at a local restaurant. If they are getting cheaper prices, I'm sure it's through no fault of their own. It is possible to order something and have the cashier give you a discount without you realizing it.

Robert, look for the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, it specifically speaks to using the position of police to get gratutities. When you find it, please post it for others to see and remind SBPD officers. Sounds like Mr. Penmen is just repackaging the act of grautity and renaming it.

Robert, may I suggest you do an article on gratutities and SBPD. Let me know when you do that & i'll give you info. ALtho I think Mr. Penmen ahs alrady identified many places cops eat at for the discounts. Someone else mentioned that the PD green/red is only sold to cops. That is absollutely true. I tried to get one and was told that by the manager of the Mexico restaraunt.

Maybe some of you should read Megan's comments....she gave you the Webster's dictionary definition of a gratuity....even THE City Attorney has told you guys this is NOT a gratuity....move on! Don't you think there are MUCH bigger problems than if a cop gets a smaller meal for a smaller price!!!! Maybe you're Chief Built and your trying to deflect from your own deficiencies!!!! MOVING ON......

I'm sorry to hear about the abuse. If you called the police, he should have been arrested and if convicted of spousal abuse..he should not be a cop today. But for you to paint all SBPD officers with the same broad paint brush is not fair....one could paint ex-wives with the same broad brush and say their all crazy. My point being...not all cops are bad....just like not all ex-wives are crazy.

Robert,

I will always ask "how dare you?" if I think something is unbelievably petty over the line. I would ask you or a government official, I don't care who it is. I do get angry when I see someone with an audience using their influence to harass people trying to do a difficult job over a $5 meal. In this case, you were clearly fishing to find something and were disappointed when you couldn't. And when someone dared to question you on it, you compare them to the racists 1950's south??

Girlfriend, please.

The city attorney not only gave you a legal opinion, he gave you the history of why the Mexico offers the PD plate. He said it much better than I could have. I'm sure you are disappointed but there are plenty of real stories out there for you to report on i.e. Billdt, the mayor Operation Phoenix, Mike Miller, the Ice-Man. This just isn't one of them.

Hi Jim,

For a moment there, I had trouble believing that was really you ... You're calling my little hypothetical "over the top?"

Talk about the pot calling the kettle noir ...

Unlike you, I don't think for a second that well-paid public servants (average SB police pay: $97,000, average SB firefighter pay: $121,000) are more deserving of special discounts at local restaurants than the Joe or Jane Sixpacks whose tax-dollars pay those salaries.

YOU SAID: "This practice breaks no law, nor any department policy. The recipient gets what he pays for, a child's plate at child's plate prices."

The question is whether the police or firefighters who get this special are getting a discount no one else can get. Clearly they are, and that treads close to being a monetary favor.

Which, of course, would not be okay.

Other points:

Your comparison of this to free meals for military servicemen and women is misleading. Soldiers headed to Iraq aren't expected to objectively police our city, thus, we are not concerned about residents buying favor from them. Local officers, on the other hand, have strict rules against accepting favors while on duty, and for good reason. Your analogy does not hold.

At one point, Jim, you sounded suspiciously close to making an argument FOR special benefits for on-duty officers: "when Joe Sixpack is willing to put on a uniform and share that life, then maybe he ought to be able to buy a PD red, or a PD green for five bucks and enjoy a few bites of a childs' plate-sized meal."

Clearly, Jim, with that phrase it sounds like you're justifying patronage.

In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that Penman is a longtime friend of The Mexico and has benefitted from tens of thousands of dollars in donations over the years from local firefighters and police unions (although the POA remained neutral in the last election).

FOCUS people!!!!! Built and the Mayor are loving the attention away from the real issues. FOCUS on the big & real problems that are eating away at the City.

A bit more ...

While the City Attorney is a longtime public servant, practitioner of the law, and generally frank and honest person, his argument on this matter have done nothing to resolve the questions initially posed.

Below, on the advice of another reader, I will post a key portion of the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics:

"I will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices, animosities or friendships to influence my decisions. With no compromise for crime and with relentless prosecution of criminal, I will enforce the law courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or ill will, never employing unnecessary force or violence and never accepting gratuities."
________

Clearly, "never accepting gratuities" is pretty straightforward.

Now, what is a gratuity? Contrary to what some readers said, "L. Heart" seems to know exactly what gratuity means.

The definition: "A favor or gift, usually in the form of money, given in return for service."

So, clearly a favor or gift is a gratuity. The rub here is the "return for service." I have no indication that there has been any returns coming to the Mexico.

Since everyone is so interested in food why don't you, Robert, do something on the meals the taxpayers footed for all of those Operation Phoenix block parties? I know for a fact that they were ordering meals for something as simple as Neighborhood Watch meetings. City employees were eating those ordered meals too, not just the OP residents.

Also, has anyone ever been to those budget meetings and the free feeds that all the city employees are "bellying" up to? Especially when the council goes into closed session - it's more like a party than a council meeting....what about the taxpayer's footing that bill?

I personally would rather see a Police Officer getting a break on his meal than feed the all of those City Hall Department Heads...I'm sure their salaries aren't so little that they need helping funding their dinners.

Robert,

I think you are missing the point. They are exchanging penny for penny the cost of the product with cash.

There is no law against that and it is a huge leap if we are suddenly, for the first time in this country, ever, (ask TR) going to say that a PRIVATE business can't provide a special meal to ANY category of people they chose, including government employees. As long as the cops aren't getting a discount or a freebee, there is no ethical, moral or legal violation that I am aware of?

I think you are bending over backwards to appear fair.

I pointed out in my previous entry that the Mexico has allowed me, and many other politicans to have fund-rasiers there. Maybe we should spend a great deal more of our time researching how much money I've received from the other restaurants I named. I can tell you now, some have contributed to my campaigns but most have not. Yet I still listed them.

As to donations from the POA, look at your own news article from September 7, 2007, page A - 1: "Split with union noisy Penman, police group part ways"

Especially check out the statement: "Lawhead later called Penman a "liar," and denied ever telling the city attorney the union's endorsement was contingent on certain actions."

"Mr. Penman's suggestions are outright lies," Lawhead said.

I'm still waiting for my apology, and still publicly defending the police chief despite the Union's no confidence vote.

No Robert, their donations have nothing to do with it. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Jesse Unruh said it many years ago, "if you can't take their money, go to their parties, eat their food, drink their liquor, dance with their wives, then vote against them in the morning, you have no business being in politics."

I defend your right to print what you want, including your belief that it is wrong for a cop to buy a meal at fair market value that isn't offered to Joe Sixpack, but I'm also free to express my opinion that the restauants in this town are free to offer all the PD specials they want under the same terms most of them already offer those specials.

By the way, while your doing your story, if you check around you'll find that cities across the country do this, and many of those do give free meals to cops. Some, not the Mexico, used to do that here in SB. But some publicity-seeking city attorney here found out about it about 20 years ago and put a stop to it. There was no news story when it happened, but you can't time all your actions to coincide with slow news days.

In my opinon, and the way the law looks at it, there's a difference between a free meal to a cop and a special meal for cops, postal workers, electricians, union members, bankers, etc., whatever class a PRIVATE restaurant wants to give "special meals" to as long as they aren't based on a protected class, "women, minorities, members of a certain religion, etc."

If the members of the class are government employees there is the added requirement that they pay fair market value.

I understand, from what you have written, that the practice offends you. It does not however violate the law, and as long as it isn't limited to SB cops, it doesn't even violate any code of conduct I've seen. Of course, we don't enforce voluntary codes that establish goals. But even if there is one out there that somehow agrees with your position, I doubt it is enforceable.

It would be interesting to see someone try to discipline an employee for buying the PD green or the PD red. I wonder if a court would uphold that discipline?

With stories like some of the ones you haven't been able to print recently hanging out there, I'm still surprised that you're so focused on this one.

But then, I do well if I can keep up with the violations of law and departmental policies of city of San Bernardino employees without trying to enforce journalistic standards of fair play when it comes to the issue of whether or not to print a story that everyone seems to feel is a newsworthy one, for reasons that appear to go beyond issues of the public's right to know, or the newspapers' right to print the truth.

Yes, I think there maybe some of the pot calling the kettle black here, but I don't think, at least not in this case, that I'm a kettle or a pot. Others of course are free to disagree.

Isn't it great we can have these debates, and pursue them with vigor while Rome is figuratively burning? Even though it is the lunch hour it is good do know, I guess that a reform-minded city attorney and a crusading reporter can still quibble over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Perhaps that is what President Bush was referring to when he said of another public debate, "that is intellectuality."

By the way, I've never had the PD green or the red, I don't meet the standards the restaurant is free to impose.

Jim Penman

Thanks Jim,

I like your last post better than your first.

I can assure you that we are focused tightly on more important issues than this.

But I have a few minutes here and there to note some logical observations.

1) I'm not suggesting we crack down on private businesses. I'm suggesting that police officers' ethical code forbids them from accepting gratuities/favors. Getting to order a menu items that average citizens cannot may be a "favor."

2) I am not offended by this practice. I don't want to order from the children's menu at The Mexico. I'm merely stating the facts and raising the question of whether this is appropriate.

3) It's good to know that you defend my right to publish. I know you quite well, and I know that is genuine. Obviously, if our city attorney didn't understand and respect the First Amendment, we'd have a real problem.

That's all. My first point is most important. I don't for a moment suggest a penalty or law against restaurants offering special bonuses, but I do suggest that the officers' Ethical Code may forbid them from accepting special treatment at the restaurant.

Thanks very much,

Robert Rogers

To All,

FOCUS is correct. The initial issues here are what's important. Does anyone truly believe that a paying $5.00 for a meal supercedes the allegations of corruption, misconduct and favoritism at the highest levels of our city government? Billdt and Morris are doing cartwheels because they are no longer the focus of this forum. Mr. Rogers asks valid questions, the answers to which can be argued by both sides of the "gratuity" issue. I will apologize, here, to L. Heart, for my childish response telling him/her to "go back to their corner."

This blog allows for the sharing of information that should be weighed and evaluated like all information. However, the primary issues are... is the Mayor acting in the best interest of the citizen's of San Bernardino? Is he burying his head in the sand with regard to his pilot program "Operation Phoenix" and the conflicts within the Police Department? Is Mayor Morris the leader of this city or not? If he is, then the citizens need to hold his feet to the fire and demand leadership-type behavior or remove him from office.

Also, is Chief Billdt committed to protecting the citizens of the city? Officers of the Police Department are expected to treat the public with respect and courtesy. Officers are also expected to have INTEGRITY and be committed to PUBLIC SAFETY. Yet, those "CORE VALUES" are not adhered to by Billdt or certain members of HIS administration. Officers are constantly investigated for violating citizen's rights while Billdt and his "hand picked" executive staff act with impunity and have an "I'm the boss, I can do whatever I want" attitude.

LEADERSHIP STARTS AT THE TOP!!!!!!!! The top being the Mayor of the city, the Chief of Police and the head of every department within the city. The employees and citizens of San Bernardino EXPECT these "LEADERS" to actually lead. MORRIS AND BILLDT have repeatedly shown that they are not capable of leading. If they won't step down, then they need to be forced out!

Edmund Burke once said, "ALL THAT IS NECESSARY FOR THE TRUIMP OF EVIL IS THAT GOOD MEN DO NOTHING." Well, the good men and women of the police department, along with the citizens of San Bernardino, are doing something. We are telling you, Mayor Morris and the City Council, Billdt and his cronies are EVIL. DO SOMETHING!!!!! If you don't, then we will come election time.

The definition: "A favor or gift, usually in the form of money, given in return for service" is just that. If anyone were to enter the Mexico or any other restaurant and ask for a child's meal you would get it. No one on this blog has any idea how much that red or green plate costs the Mexico to serve and therefore CANNOT place a value on it. Not even you Robert! AND a gift (or as you claim a discount) is a nothing of the sort. It is an alacare small beef burrito with red or green sauce. What service do they offer in exchange? This argument is ludicrous. So then should the personal use of city cars for the Capts and Lts constitute a gratuity made to them by the city? And when you as a private citizen (who happens to be a public safety officer) go into a restaurant and have your meal comped because you complain, is that a gratuity? What if you are a restaurant patron and your meal is bad but you are also an elected official? Then what?

"I will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices, animosities or friendships to influence my decisions. With no compromise for crime and with relentless prosecution of criminal, I will enforce the law courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or ill will, never employing unnecessary force or violence and never accepting gratuities."

THIS is the big one (the first sentence) and it appears that the guiltiest of this one is the Chief. But it all starts at the top and if the Mayor took this oath...wait a minute, didn't he take this oath as a judge? and also one as the Mayor at his inauguration...then he is VERY guilty of violating the public's trust.

L Heart has an issue with Lawhead but is also diverting her attention to the fact that an investigation was botched (and maybe intentionally). That is the story and Robert, keep sticking to it. You're on the right track!

Robert,

Thank you for the clarification.

Jim Penman

Thanks for the apology B.S. accepted and returned. The question isn't really if Police should get a $5.00 meal at the Mexico it is that they expect it at many businesses and do businesses feel pressure to extend it to get special services from the officers. The answer I would thing is yes. The most telling is Carlos Obriens which really hasn't been touched on. They have had serveral issues with police and crime issue including a murder but police officers were going there for free drinks after work. Obviously the extra off duty police pressence could have helped Carlos Obriens but was it a conflict for police. Also when administration tried to discipline these officers the union pressured administration to back off. Officer receive and expect discounts at many places in San Bernardino including the Orange Show, although most of them do not live in San Bernardino.

To Jim Penman if a building inspector was inspecting restaurants and receiving discounts you would be the first to call that into question. But if a Police Officer, or Fire Fighters receive specials discounts from businesses they inspect and protect (and these are discounts not dollar for dollar, 20% off at Denny's is a gratuity) you defend them. Is this because you get gratuities from Fire and Police?

In response to all the BS about the gratuities that officers get. They pay what price is on their bill. Just like everyone else does. Do you get pissy with the elderly because they order of the "cheaper" senior menu. Do you get pissy with the children that order off the "cheaper" children's menu. And I personally have gone to the Mexico and ordered the PD Red or PD Green, and was served with a smile. And I am not an officer or a firefighter. THANK YOU MR PENMAN for your comments and explanations. If only everyone could understand what you're trying to explain.

to L. Heart
Thank you for accepting my apology. I truly am embarassed about my remarks to you. I'm just "sick and tired of the BS." We're back on the right track...I don't have any personal knoweldge about the Carlos O'Briens incident. You apparently have heard something that has raised your hackles. If you have an issue you can support with facts, I encourage you to come forward.

As a police officer I have never!!! asked for a discount at any establishment. Most Officers I know will never ask for a discount. Are there businesses that give officers discounts on food? Absolutely. Are there officers that eat at those establishments? Absolutely. If a business chooses to discount a meal for a police officer(and many do) that's their peragative. If an officer asks for a discount, that's a different story. And those officers should be ashamed. We do get paid well. Lunch should not be an issue.

The real issue is....Is the Chief of Police creating an atmosphere of intimidation and favoratism? Is the Mayor turning a blind eye to the managers he appointed to key positions within the city? And, are the citizen's of San Bernardino receiving the best possible service?

I think the answer to each question is an emphatic "NO. I'll go out on a limb here. Mr. Penman, L. Heart and I agree on a concept....Police Corruption is unacceptable. We were focused on the corruption of the city managers. Webster's dictionary defines corruption as the "impairment of integrity, virtue, or moral principle." As leaders of the city, Mayor Morris and Chief Billdt have attained the epitmony of corruption.

To Rather Not Say:

You are absolutely right. But watch yourself, if you go on this blog and defend a private business owner's right to comp or discount a bill if they choose, you just might find yourself accused of defending the racist practices of the businesses owners of the 1950s south. I know I was.

That comparison didn't even make sense. When I read that in Robert's response I was like, "huh?" The example of businesses in the south refusing to serve black customers in the 1950s has absolutely nothing to do with a private business today offering a discount to a police officer. (Honestly, I think he threw the racist 1950s card at me when I dared to question him because he didn't know how else to respond.)

Regardless of how you backtrack now, Robert, you did indicate that you felt there should be some enforcement to make sure police officers weren't "accepting gratuities." Hmm, that sounds like policing private businesses to my racist 1950s ears! Of course, you are probably right Robert, that's where our police budget money should go, not toward new hires but toward policing private businesses to make sure they don't give any silly "gratuities." Ah, now that sounds like money well-spent. I for one, will sleep better at night knowing that no on-duty cop is gonna get a $5 burrito dinner! Not on Rogers' watch!

I mean with all the REAL problems going on in this city with the top brass (i.e. Operation Phoenix, the mayoral and police chief cover-up, Lawrence) is something as petty as whether or not some cop gets a $5 meal seriously a priority for you? Because if so, then I hope you blow this story wide open! I'm sure it'll impress future employers.

How sad I have to say it again. Girlfriend, please.

To "Rather not Say,"

Elderly folks and children can get special items on the menu. No problem.

Police officers, however, have an Ethical Code they sign onto when they serve. It says they are to accept no favors of monetary value while on duty. If they accept discounts on food while on duty, that may violate the Ethical Code. The Ethical Code exists for good reason.

To "Anonymous" above:

You originally wrote: "Anyone who owns their own restaurant business has the right to provide free meals or meals at a discounted price to whomever they choose. It is THEIR business, after all ... How dare you try to tell private business owners how to run their business!"

My retort to that was simple: That private businesses cannot do whatever they wish. When private businesses discrimminate, for instance, government has a duty to react. Again, owning a business does not give anyone a license to treat customers any way they wish.

I have made my point over and over again. Whether I have engaged formidable logicians like Mr. Penman or someone like yourself, my point has stood because, alas, it is irrefutable.

I'm going to make it real simple: Police have a code. The code says they cannot accept favors while on duty. On-duty police ordering items at prices not available to adults in the general public would constitute a favor.

If there is a way you can reconcile this, I'd like to read it. On the other hand, if you want to call names, suggest I am a woman (do you think I'll be insulted by that?), or suggest that I work on "real" issues (who do you think has been investigating Operation Phoenix, Lawrence, etc.?), then don't bother.

Thanks,

Robert Rogers

To "Sick and Tired of the BS."

I want to start with two compliments.

1) You are one of my favorite readers/writers. Glad to have your opinions here.

2) I commend you for reaching a truce with L. Heart. It spoke volumes of your character.

Now for one other note. You clearly suggested that an officer should not solicit a gratuity, but that it is okay if a business owner provides one.

I don't think that is right. The Code of Ethics the officers have vowed to uphold is clear. It doesn't say not to "ask" for a gratuity, it says not to "accept" one.

Unfortunately, getting a discounted meal while on-duty, while it may seem harmless, is not allowable under the Code. Officers mindful of their Code should insist on paying the same price Joe and Jane Sixpack would be charged.

I am right on this. I suspect that with some more reflection, you know that I'm right on this.

Remember another thing. Despite all the rhetorical fireworks between Mr. Penman and I during our earlier debate, he did not once dispute that the Code does not permit acceptance of any gratuity. He can't. My position is incontrovertible. It's not even an opinion. I'm not engaging in opinion journalism.

It's simply a fact.

Thank you again,

Robert Rogers

Mr. Rogers,

your response is logical. However, police officers do not accept the PD special with the expectation that they will recipricate in some manner. I don't believe that the Mexico or any other restaurant expects anything from the poice department because of some perceived gratuity.

Please use this forum to "out" true corruption, such as that exhibited by the police administration and the mayors office. After those issues have been resolved then we can focus on a $5.00 meal.

To "Sick and Tired of the BS,"

Thank you for discussing these issues with us all. As you suggest, I will get back to work on other matters.

Have a good night,

Robert Rogers

Mr. Rogers,

Thank you for your compliments. I try to be fair and I only want to offer another perspective.

First, I want to tell you that several times I have been offered a free meal/cup of coffee, only to argue that I make enough money that I can pay for the meal. Some places just want to thank us for our service. If an agreement isn't reached, I, as do many officers, will leave an larger tip to make up the differnce. While I don't want to continue this argument, what are we to do when people offer to buy our meals as a means of thanking us for our service. I've tried to reject the jesture, but it's also insulting to the offerer. Is is a gratuity or a way of thanking us? i don't think there's a clear answer. the only way to avoid this controversy is to not patronize businesses within the city.

Secondly, these are not the true issues. The city managers and their lack of management skills are the real issue. Please put this train back on track. Everyone needs to know the issues. Your blog is that forum. Please keep searching for the truth!

Robert,

No need to get defensive. This is a forum for discussion and opinions and sometimes other people's are going to be different from yours, freedom of speech and all that. You really shouldn't let your emotions get the best of you or it will negatively impact your reporting which needs to be open-minded and unbiased.

Seriously, if the fact that I say "Girlfriend, please" to you (something I say to a lot of people when I'm engaged in a lively discussion, regardless of their gender, its just who I am) upsets you so much, ask yourself why you are so upset about it. I'm a woman, so why would I consider that an insult? You basically accused me of defending racist 1950s practices and you got upset when I called you out on it. There cannot be two sets of standards here, one for me and one for you, where you can say any unflattering thing you like and no one can respond.

As far as reconciling this "gratuity" issue, I'm not sure which way to go mainly because I remain unconvinced that it's an issue at all. You wrote: "When private businesses discrimminate, for instance, government has a duty to react." I for one, see no discrimination in giving someone a discount. I do know however, think policing businesses in San Bernardino is not the answer and would only chase businesses away. Therefore, you would have to rely on an honor system, which pretty much means things would stay the same as they are now. So I suggest this, continue to focus on the most pressing issues at hand. Keep the pressure on Billdt and on the mayor and Lawrence, you are doing an excellent job on these stories. And if you hear of a police officer accepting a bribe like money or sexual favors in return for looking the other way during a crime or throwing away a citation, then by all means SOUND THE ALARM. Report the hell out of it.

But may be, just may be, pick your battles and decide whether a cops buys a $5 discounted burrito is really a story or not.

Anonymous,

My emotions have not got the best of me during our discussion. I am, however, a bit amused by the way you keep misinterpreting my statements. The "how dare you" stuff is also a little overblown, but I've heard that before.

I wrote: "suggest I am a woman (do you think I'll be insulted by that?)." I did that because you kept saying "girlfriend please." I asked, rhetorically, whether you thought I was insulted by that. My message was that I am not. As you know, some people imply that men have female attributes as a way of insulting them. I don't buy into that nonsense.

Again and again, I have said Police have an Ethics Code. The Code says they cannot accept favors while on duty. On-duty police ordering items at prices not available to adults in the general public would constitute a favor.

That is the issue.

Now, since you're a reader of the blog, you know I have always picked my battles wisely. Who else is digging away at Phoenix, Lawrence, etc., besides myself, Andrew and Mike?

That said, I'm an energetic guy. I know a lot about journalism. I know a lot about local government. I know a lot about ethics. I can take a few minutes out of my day to discuss public servant gratuities with you without the rest of my work suffering. Interacting with readers is part of my job, and a part I relish, I might add.

This isn't a story, at least not yet. It's just an educational debate I'm having with you, Mr. Penman, and other readers.

Thanks again,

Robert Rogers

Spirit of the law vs Letter of the law, it is just a matter of viewpoint. We don't complain when Morris eats off the taxpayers dime, at all of the "Block Party" type events. Why not draw the line there?

As for red plates or green plate lunches, it is fairly clear cut. Retaurants like Mexico are doing the right things for the right reasons. Let the cops eat their child plate lunches, at least they paid for their food.

Robert,

Despite my cantankerous attitude toward you I will say this, I may not always agree with you but you always welcome discourse from the public and you always find time to respond. Not everyone does. I have to respect that.

I am sorry if my saying "Girlfriend Please" to you came across as rude. Most people have a good laugh when they hear me say that to people of both genders but when you are writing something I guess the tone and inflection can't really be heard.

Before this whole blogging thing, I wasn't really much into reading the paper on the Internet but this blog the Sun is doing is really a great idea. And since you've been covering the city and writing this blog I've learned more about the public officials in my city than I ever knew before, so thanks for that. Keep up the good work Robert! Keep the pressure on those who need it. I hope to read many more of your blog postings and stories.

Sincerely,

Girlfriend Please

"Girlfriend Please,"

Well said. Thanks for the discourse. I am very happy to get your take on these issues.

Thank you,

Robert Rogers

C'mon Robert,

What Penman said and more. You can't have you donut and eat it too.

One thing to remember about the Officer's red or green plate specials is that they do not have a paid lunch. The Officers eat on the fly. Therefore, when a call comes in, they leave their meal on the plate and answer the call. We need to be thanking our Officers for such dedication, and tipping our hats to restaurants like the Mexico for being change agents in our community.

Also, we need to be careful what we ask for here. If we pick the battle that Officers can't buy a child's plate portion, then I say the POA needs to negotiate a non paid lunch for these Officers. However, on a non paid lunch, we can not expect these Officers to answer ANY calls durring that half hour break. They can then pay for a full priced adult meal and enjoy it. If the restaurant they are eating in gets robbed, oh well. They can deal with it when their lunch break is over. Is that the end results we want? Heavens no. How many times have our officers responded to situations while off duty? Too numerous to count.

Furthermore, I don't see any food police patroling Mickey Dees when I order a hamburger happy meal for myself. I have never been required to show ID proving I am under a certain age or have to produce a child in order to place my order. I just order the item and pay for it with my hard earned money, just like the Officers do. You say the green and red plates aren't on the menu.........continue reading.

The other day I had lunch with my husband and ordered an item that wasn't on the menu at Marios in Riverside. I asked the chef if he would prepare a seafood alfredo and he did. I went further to say I did not want a large portion but a half portion. (I don't eat a lot of food at any one sitting.) The Chef complied and gave me a like rate for the smaller portions, not unlike what many restaurants do for our Officers.

I enjoy all of your pot stirring, I really do! I just think this is a silly stretch to say the officers are taking bribes when eating at local restaurants. We would have to go way back to the time when restaurants closed at ten to see when this "practice" started. Yep, before we had 24 hour drive thrus. Cops would frequent donut shops. The bakers were busy making donuts durring the night to have when they opened in the morning. Cops routinely would go and PAY for a cup of coffee and get an occasional "free" donut hole. The bakers at that time routinely threw the donut holes into the trash. Hence, many a cop and donut jokes were born. If memory serves me well, news reporters took the officers lead and started frequenting donut shops in the early morning hours. Perhaps it wasn't the donut holes calling their names, but an attempt to get the "dish" from the officer as to what had gone down in the city the night before. So I say Robert, you can't have your donut and eat it too.

Hi Shelby,

I have engaged a lot of people on this issue, Penman included, and I've only solidified one position: The Ethics Code the officers have accepted doesn't allow favors on-duty.

Now, we have a lot of apologists for this stuff on the blog. I understand that many of you really like the rank-and-file and really dislike the mayor and the chief.

I don't have any favorites.

Unfortunately, getting a discounted meal while on-duty, while it may seem harmless, is not allowable under the Code. Officers mindful of their Code should insist on paying the same price Joe and Jane Sixpack would be charged.

I have numerous written admissions on this very thread that diners all over town give favors to police officers. Police officers should kindly decline.

Robert Rogers

Hello Robert,

Why don't you run this idea of discounted meals for Police pass the District Attorney's Public Integrity Unit? You should also forward City Attorney Penman's post past them...I am curious to hear what the officials have to say about this. In addition to his view on the issue, I believe it was just unethical for a City Attorney to give such an over the top response and just wrong overall for him to list all of those restaurants without consulting with each of them first. What do you think? Also, I believe Mr. Penman is wrong, I think the Police Department does have policies against this practice.

Let us know if you will follow through please.

Anonymous too,

I will ask the public integrity unit what they think of this. I will probably be doing a story about the rules regarding favors to on-duty officers.

As for Penman's response, yes, it was initially overblown, as I previously stated. It is also important to note that Mr. Penman may have political calculations as well. These public servants and some of these business owners are big backers of his political career.

As for policies/procedures, I know that at the very least the Ethical Code (for all peace officers) that I posted above clearly forbids accepting any gifts, favors, discounts etc. As for the department's own policies, I'm certain that there is a specific one regarding not accepting gratuities.

It's important not to forget why these rules are in place. In America, we don't want people giving police personnel anything. The line between a nice gesture and currying favor is a very thin one indeed.

Thank you,

Robert

Robert,

The letter of the law versus the spirit of the law is an idiomatic antithesis. When one obeys the letter of the law but not the spirit, he is obeying the literal interpretation of the words (the "letter") of the law, but not the intent of those who wrote the law. Conversely, when one obeys the spirit of the law but not the letter, he is doing what the authors of the law intended, though not adhering to the literal wording.

Have you ever been pulled over for driving faster than the posted speed limit? I am not talking about speeding 90 miles an hour in a school zone, but rather a few miles over the limit. The officer may just give you a warning and remind you to slow down. Spirit of the law. By your standard, he should write tickets every time? Letter of the law. Does your position change if you are a doctor rushing to the hospital to perform a life saving surgery? Does your position change if you are a fireman rushing to a fire? Does your position change if you are being beaten and an officer rushes to your aid?

I have always understood that people who behave according to the letter of the law maybe technically correct, but may miss the point or spirit of why the law was made in the first place.

William Shakespeare wrote numerous plays dealing with the letter v. spirit debate, almost always coming down on the side of "spirit", often forcing villains (who always sided with the letter-based arguments) to have their letter-based interpretations turned against them. For example, see The Merchant of Venice and Measure for Measure.

I guess if things were clear cut, we would not have the need for attorneys. For me, I will take letter of the law in this particular case. There is a big difference in getting a discounted meal, and taking money as a bribe. Just my humble opinion.

The letter of the law versus the spirit of the law is an idiomatic antithesis. When one obeys the letter of the law but not the spirit, he is obeying the literal interpretation of the words (the "letter") of the law, but not the intent of those who wrote the law. Conversely, when one obeys the spirit of the law but not the letter, he is doing what the authors of the law intended, though not adhering to the literal wording.

Have you ever been pulled over for driving faster than the posted speed limit? I am not talking about speeding 90 miles an hour in a school zone, but rather a few miles over the limit. The officer may just give you a warning and remind you to slow down. Spirit of the law. By your standard, he should write tickets every time? Letter of the law. Does your position change if you are a doctor rushing to the hospital to perform a life saving surgery? Does your position change if you are a fireman rushing to a fire? Does your position change if you are being beaten and an officer rushes to your aid?

I have always understood that people who behave according to the letter of the law maybe technically correct, but may miss the point or spirit of why the law was made in the first place.

William Shakespeare wrote numerous plays dealing with the letter v. spirit debate, almost always coming down on the side of "spirit", often forcing villains (who always sided with the letter-based arguments) to have their letter-based interpretations turned against them. For example, see The Merchant of Venice and Measure for Measure.

I guess if things were clear cut, we would not have the need for attorneys. For me, I will take letter of the law in this particular case. There is a big difference in getting a discounted meal, and taking money as a bribe. Just my humble opinion

Hi Shelby Harrison,

I'm not going to go to the trouble of dissecting all the false analogies contained in your otherwise rather erudite statement.

All the stuff about extraordinary circumstances in which the letter of the law becomes (rightfully so) malleable was way off base. Giving officers the flexibility to give warnings instead of tickets has nothing to do with officers selectively deciding when to follow their Ethical Code and not accept gratuities, including discounted meals. There is a rule against one. There is no rule against the other.

I will say this: Accepting a discounted meal is not as bad as taking a direct bribe. Never said it was. It is, however, a violation of the Ethical Code.

Lawyers are useful in translating arcane legal matters. But this isn't one of them.

The Code says "accept no gratuities." I don't see how it could be any clearer.

Thanks, as always, for reading and writing.

Robert Rogers

Shelby,

... and something should be said for the spirit in which the officers' Ethical Code was written.

Few circumstances are more noxious to democracy and equal rights than when the people granted the power to police are corrupted, even slightly, by the accepting of favors from segments of the population they police.

Look at Mexico (since it's so close) or any other nation beset by corruption in its police forces. One of the hallmarks of these places is law enforcement agencies that regularly accepts gifts, bribes, gratuities, etc.

I'm not for a second suggesting that we're in a similar situation here, or that our public servants are akin to those in Third World countries.

But throw out policies and the Ethical Code restricting the acceptance of gifts, and watch as the spirit and letter of impartial law fall into disrepute.

Since you like Shakespeare, I'll leave you with a pearl of wisdom from the man himself:

"! will praise any man that will praise me." --Enobarbus, Act II, scene vi

Thank you,

Robert Rogers

Blah, blah, blah.

Mr. Rogers,

I'm not being sarcastic....I believe in your right to express your opinion. We've had debates ranging from Shakespear to the "cop/dougnut" analogy, although the current rage is Starbucks and croissants.

Officer's have the discretion to write tickets and/or arrest people. They are expected to use "common sense." Can we write tickets for "California stops" or a "little weed"? Of course. Do we always. No...."DISCRETION"!!!! ("Weed" being Marijuana, which is illegal without a prescription)

So, why has this issue of a $5.00 lunch become such a huge issue?

FOCUS on your elected officials abusing their power!!!!!

Sick and Tired of the BS,

I assure you I am focused on more pressing issues.

However, just a little gratuity here and there is not acceptable. Officers should NEVER accept favors of monetary value while on-duty. There is no rule against NEVER letting a motorist off with a warning, but there IS an Ethical Code that says NEVER to accept gratuities (favors). Officer have discretion on one, but not the other.

We've been back and forth on this, and that's fine. But I am clearly right on this key point: No acceptance of gratuities while on-duty is permissible under the officers' Ethical Code.

Many people are clearly apologists for disobeyance of the Code. Anyone advocating the disregarding of the Code doesn't take the Code seriously. If they don't take the Code seriously, that is troubling, because the Code is crucial to fair and professional public service.

My logic here is unassailable, tight as a drum.

Thank you again for discussing this with me and everyone else. I hope you take my disagreement with you on this one issue in the friendly spirit in which it is given.

Thank you,

Robert Rogers

Robert,
Went to the sandwich shop you wrote about in the blogg with a girlfriend of mine. I told the owner I had seen your profile of the restaurant in the SB Now blog, he said he owed you a "free" sandwich for all the business you have drummed up for him. Wouldn't that be a gratuity :)

Just poking fun at ya.

Shelby Harrison,

Oh my, you are too funny! Glad you went there. The owner is a nice guy and has a great story. I was glad I could tell it. I think a lot of people are pulling for his business to stay alive downtown.

Talk to ya later,

Robert Rogers

MR. Rogers,

You argument opposing "any" type of gratuity is infallible. The Police Officer's Code of Ethics was written as a means of ensuring that officers do not abuse the power with which they are entrusted. Checkmate! I've enjoyed our debate.

You take a high school graduate, run them through an academy (24 weeks or whatever), then put them on the street and then we wonder why they go bad and this despite excellent salaries (police in LA make an average right now of over $93,000.00 per year). Stealing, excessive force, etc... I mean who can do anything about it? The police police themselves right?