View Full Version : Police Misconduct?? *merged threads*
After the commercial on Studio B with Shepard Smith, he is going to be covering the case, esp mentioned Drew's police misconduct!
This is just a heads up and the thread may be deleted!
Shep just mentioned that DP is accused of abuse of powers, while a law enforcement officer.
Then he brought up the blue barrel, and Drew allegedly trying to get a trucker to transport it, which Shep was not really up to par on, since he'd been sick all weekend.
The former NYPD officer that Shep had on as a guest said he would think that finding and verifying that story and finding the salt and pepper haired guy would be a top priority for investigators at this point.
close_enough
12-03-2007, 03:13 PM
i'm watching it now..thanks Liz!
yeah, DP ran ID checks thru LE for his own personal use....i have to be honest; i'd say that happens a lot in LE....they have so much access to stuff like that...if they can't do it, they can always get a clerk to do it for them....i worked for the Traffic Bureau for a short period of time, years ago, & i know for a fact, folks could access all kinds of info on people through that office....
Vegas Bride
12-03-2007, 03:14 PM
This could be what takes his pension away right?
VB
I'll leave this thread up for a little while so anyone who wants can read it. But since there's really nothing new here, I'll delete it after awhile. :)
ETA OOPS ... unless y'all don't want me to.
ISPTRAX
12-03-2007, 03:17 PM
This could be what takes his pension away right?
VB
YES!!!!:D
close_enough
12-03-2007, 03:17 PM
Shep just mentioned that DP is accused of abuse of powers, while a law enforcement officer.
Then he brought up the blue barrel, and Drew allegedly trying to get a trucker to transport it, which Shep was not really up to par on, since he'd been sick all weekend.
The former NYPD officer that Shep had on as a guest said he would think that finding and verifying that story and finding the salt and pepper haired guy would be a top priority for investigators at this point.
no kidding!...this salt & pepper guy would have to know the scoop, IMO....
Close, I would imagine it is pretty common. But then again, most of those people are not under investigation for the disappearance of their wife!
KWIM???
Yep, Vegas, sure could!
nanandjim
12-03-2007, 03:20 PM
i'm watching it now..thanks Liz!
yeah, DP ran ID checks thru LE for his own personal use....i have to be honest; i'd say that happens a lot in LE....they have so much access to stuff like that...if they can't do it, they can always get a clerk to do it for them....i worked for the Traffic Bureau for a short period of time, years ago, & i know for a fact, folks could access all kinds of info on people through that office....
This is an offense that would get you fired...running checks for personal reasons and not business. It would be great if they could actually prove it. Ijust don't how they will.
MagicRose99
12-03-2007, 03:31 PM
This is an offense that would get you fired...running checks for personal reasons and not business. It would be great if they could actually prove it. Ijust don't how they will.
Government agencies (and I imagine LE would too) have employees sign an agreement that they will not use their resources for personal gain of any kind... if your caught you can be fired and/or brought up on charges.
TGIRecovered
12-03-2007, 03:31 PM
Close, I would imagine it is pretty common. But then again, most of those people are not under investigation for the disappearance of their wife!
KWIM???
Yep, Vegas, sure could!
I guess it would depend upon the integrity of the leadership in the department, but where my hubby works it is a BIG NO-NO.
Someone might get away with it a time or two if no one complained but as soon as it became known the person would be reprimanded, suspended from access to that data, and investigated to see if they were guilty of using that info to commit official oppression, which is a crime.
If an officer had any credibility then pulled something like that I'm sure they would be monitored closely after that, even if they only did it to be nosey but committed no crime.
susan
i.b.nora
12-03-2007, 03:34 PM
This was posted about on the Drew Peterson #2 thread earlier today.
SuzieQ posted an ABCNews article and people are discussing it.
donnam
12-03-2007, 03:38 PM
This is an offense that would get you fired...running checks for personal reasons and not business. It would be great if they could actually prove it. Ijust don't how they will.
Maybe he was accessing this info by logging in from his home pc thinking no one could track it that way. They did seize his computer. That would be proof enough I would think.
close_enough
12-03-2007, 03:38 PM
Close, I would imagine it is pretty common. But then again, most of those people are not under investigation for the disappearance of their wife!
KWIM???
Yep, Vegas, sure could!
good point!
JerzWhim
12-03-2007, 03:38 PM
This is an offense that would get you fired...running checks for personal reasons and not business. It would be great if they could actually prove it. Ijust don't how they will.
If any of the people he ran popped a warrant, then there is a good chance there would be a record of that search. NY State has such a system in place. Its purpose is to alert the agency that issued the warrant or has interest in the person (criminal court, parole officer, another PD, etc.) that someone is investigating their suspect. That way, the original agency can immediately contact the investigator who ideally has the person he is investigating in custody.
The NYPD is constantly firing civilians who use the warrant search system to check on the backgrounds of their new boyfriends/girlfriends. The firing results when the boyfriend/girlfriend pops a warrant, a department alert is auto-generated and then the Department learns that nobody was arrested to satisfy the warrant check. A nice system of checks and balances to prevent abuse. Most PDs do not operate on that level.
A worriesome thought just occured to me. What IF he was researching truckers for past or recent offenses, so that he might be able to approach them about transporting a package and getting something off their record?
Would that even be in the realm of possibilities?
close_enough
12-03-2007, 03:47 PM
I guess it would depend upon the integrity of the leadership in the department, but where my hubby works it is a BIG NO-NO.Someone might get away with it a time or two if no one complained but as soon as it became known the person would be reprimanded, suspended from access to that data, and investigated to see if they were guilty of using that info to commit official oppression, which is a crime.
If an officer had any credibility then pulled something like that I'm sure they would be monitored closely after that, even if they only did it to be nosey but committed no crime.
susan
yes, it's a big NO-NO, but that's the thing; it's rare anyone ever complains, because THEY might need a 'favor' one day....someone that doesn't like DP is just now spilling the beans over this..wonder why him doing this wasn't reported before now....?
anyway, i'm glad it's happening to him & hopefully this will screw up his retirement $$:D
close_enough
12-03-2007, 03:50 PM
If any of the people he ran popped a warrant, then there is a good chance there would be a record of that search. NY State has such a system in place. Its purpose is to alert the agency that issued the warrant or has interest in the person (criminal court, parole officer, another PD, etc.) that someone is investigating their suspect. That way, the original agency can immediately contact the investigator who ideally has the person he is investigating in custody.
The NYPD is constantly firing civilians who use the warrant search system to check on the backgrounds of their new boyfriends/girlfriends. The firing results when the boyfriend/girlfriend pops a warrant, a department alert is auto-generated and then the Department learns that nobody was arrested to satisfy the warrant check. A nice system of checks and balances to prevent abuse. Most PDs do not operate on that level.
exactly....most don't
SeriouslySearching
12-03-2007, 03:51 PM
anyway, i'm glad it's happening to him & hopefully this will screw up his retirement $$:DWouldn't the children be able to collect this money if he went to jail?!
close_enough
12-03-2007, 03:55 PM
A worriesome thought just occured to me. What IF he was researching truckers for past or recent offenses, so that he might be able to approach them about transporting a package and getting something off their record?
Would that even be in the realm of possibilities?
hmmm, i just don't know Liz...i'm trying to think how he could get a name or a driver's license number to start with....the plate wouldn't help him, i wouldn't think, since these trucker's plates are out of state....i'm thinking:waitasec:
i have no idea...
close_enough
12-03-2007, 03:56 PM
Wouldn't the children be able to collect this money if he went to jail?!
i wouldn't think so, but i could be wrong....
Thanks Chico for removing the "Fox News" and the "alert" icon, from this thread title. :) I didn't want to delete it after so many posters responded.
Here is a link to the article pertaining to police misconduct that was posted earlier today by SuziQ, and you, Chico, in the media links thread, in case anyone missed it. (Thanks to you both!)
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=5810272
Leila
12-03-2007, 05:11 PM
Fox News reporting on this right now in their 2:00pm news hour. They reported that DP was doing background checks on Stacy's family just prior to her going missing.
A reporter asked DP about doing these background checks, and this was his response (paraphrasing): "There's about 5 families here in this area that are losing their homes. Why don't you put your time and resources into helping those families instead of harassing mine."
Greta was asked about the latest developments in the case and she stated that the two trucker that were approached refused to take the package. Greta said that if this is true, it's a bombshell. She said that hypothetically if DP got a no from these two truckers, he could have gotten a yes from another trucker later on in the wee hours of the morning of Oct. 29th.
SuziQ
12-03-2007, 06:09 PM
Thanks Chico for removing the "Fox News" and the "alert" icon, from this thread title. :) I didn't want to delete it after so many posters responded.
Here is a link to the article pertaining to police misconduct that was posted earlier today by SuziQ, and you, Chico, in the media links thread, in case anyone missed it. (Thanks to you both!)
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=5810272
This thread is a good idea, I say leave it.
SeriouslySearching
12-03-2007, 06:15 PM
Prosecutors Take Over Internal Peterson Probe
CHICAGO (AP) ― Prosecutors are reviewing an internal Bolingbrook Police investigation to determine whether a former sergeant suspected in his wife's disappearance could be criminally charged for what the department alleges were instances of official misconduct.
Attorney Joel Brodsky said Monday that Peterson denies using department computers or databases to gather information about his wife's family or friends or in any unauthorized way. Brodsky said he has written in a letter to Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow that charging Peterson with doing so would constitute "vindictive prosecution" because others have not been charged with a practice Brodsky says is widespread.
~snip~
The attorney speculated a truck driver who had been so sought out had seen Peterson in the news and "all of a sudden sticks Drew's face onto this guy who approached him in the truck stop."
"And now we've got some bologna lead we've got to chase down," he said.
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/drew.peterson.stacy.2.601524.html
At least he refrained from using the word "crazy" this time. Now he is going to start using lunchmeat metaphors. : )
mysteriew
12-03-2007, 06:29 PM
Most likely Drew P ran a check on Scott Rosotto. That just sounds like something a police officer would do if he had suspicions that his wife might be having an affair. We know that Drew P most likely got Rosotto's address, because that is where he went to make the phone call.
But doing checks on her family members? Why would he do that?
You know Drew P complains a lot about not having privacy with the media camped outside his door. But it seems that he himself may be guilty of invading other's privacy through his official position.
Leila
12-03-2007, 06:37 PM
Prosecutors Take Over Internal Peterson Probe
CHICAGO (AP) ― Prosecutors are reviewing an internal Bolingbrook Police investigation to determine whether a former sergeant suspected in his wife's disappearance could be criminally charged for what the department alleges were instances of official misconduct.
Attorney Joel Brodsky said Monday that Peterson denies using department computers or databases to gather information about his wife's family or friends or in any unauthorized way. Brodsky said he has written in a letter to Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow that charging Peterson with doing so would constitute "vindictive prosecution" because others have not been charged with a practice Brodsky says is widespread.
~snip~
The attorney speculated a truck driver who had been so sought out had seen Peterson in the news and "all of a sudden sticks Drew's face onto this guy who approached him in the truck stop."
"And now we've got some bologna lead we've got to chase down," he said.
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/drew.peterson.stacy.2.601524.html
At least he refrained from using the word "crazy" this time. Now he is going to start using lunchmeat metaphors. : )
In a round about way Brodsky says that DP DID do the background checks on Stacy's family and friends, because he states that it's a vindictive prosecution for something that is widespread. It's the old, "everyone does it" excuse for DP's wrong-doing.
Greybeard
12-03-2007, 06:43 PM
Along these same lines: I read the list of the 18 or so calls by both Drew and his third wife To the cops during their divorce. It seems Drew stopped her and wrote her a ticket
For having Bald Tires on her car. He thought that was pretty funny. The DA dropped
That charge after she vowed to fight it. Later on, “someone” broke into her house and
Took a certain couple pieces of jewelry Drew had bought. I wonder who that could have been? Speaking of which; on I believe Oct 18 or thereabouts he bought an expensive
Ring for Stacy. I wonder if that was found in the house, or did she take that with her?
Also there was mention one of their Undercover Cops was ratted out by a fellow officer.
I believe Mr. Peterson is suspected there too. I would guess that particular item could really get
Someone upset. He is lucky he is even Getting a pension eh? Maybe using that computer
for background checks is the very Least of his problems.
Greybeard
SeriouslySearching
12-03-2007, 07:07 PM
In a round about way Brodsky says that DP DID do the background checks on Stacy's family and friends, because he states that it's a vindictive prosecution for something that is widespread. It's the old, "everyone does it" excuse for DP's wrong-doing.I would take it to mean that, too. Why write a letter like that if it is "nothing", "bologna", "craziness", or "nonsense"?!
lewielew
12-03-2007, 07:11 PM
DP avoided internal investigation meeting with his atty by resigning day before hearing, therefore, saving his pension and prosecution:
bye, bye drew
http://nwitimes.com/artic...ap-state-il/d8ta7ba00.txt (http://nwitimes.com/articles/2007/12/03/ap-state-il/d8ta7ba00.txt)
lewielew
12-03-2007, 07:12 PM
Was that the call to Ric Mims?
thats what i am hearing but read my new post
DP avoided internal investigation meeting with his atty by resigning day before hearing, therefore, saving his pension and prosecution:
bye, bye drew
http://nwitimes.com/artic...ap-state-il/d8ta7ba00.txt (http://nwitimes.com/articles/2007/12/03/ap-state-il/d8ta7ba00.txt)
SeriouslySearching
12-03-2007, 07:18 PM
I had posted this on the other thread, but it probably does need it's own. So you think they will get him on this as a criminal charge to put him behind bars then take their time with the other cases?
chicoliving
12-03-2007, 07:19 PM
I'm gonna merge this thread with "Police Misconduct??" since its all about the same thing. :)
lewielew
12-03-2007, 07:20 PM
I had posted this on the other thread, but it probably does need it's own. So you think they will get him on this as a criminal charge to put him behind bars then take their time with the other cases? absolutely
hmmm, i just don't know Liz...i'm trying to think how he could get a name or a driver's license number to start with....the plate wouldn't help him, i wouldn't think, since these trucker's plates are out of state....i'm thinking:waitasec:
i have no idea...
The plate would help him if this truck driver was a owner operator the Semi plate would be in the drivers name and when he ran the plate all the info would be right there.
Tom'sGirl
12-03-2007, 07:31 PM
I'm gonna merge this thread with "Police Misconduct??" since its all about the same thing. :)
Thank you Chico!
mysteriew
12-03-2007, 07:40 PM
thats what i am hearing but read my new post
DP avoided internal investigation meeting with his atty by resigning day before hearing, therefore, saving his pension and prosecution:
bye, bye drew
http://nwitimes.com/artic...ap-state-il/d8ta7ba00.txt (http://nwitimes.com/articles/2007/12/03/ap-state-il/d8ta7ba00.txt)
If he didn't think they could prove the charge, he would have stayed and fought it out.
Taximom
12-03-2007, 07:44 PM
Sorry, SS, I thought everyone knew where we put that transcript. Thanks, Chico.
mysteriew
12-03-2007, 07:47 PM
Brodsky has alleged that running names of friends and relatives was something that most of the police officers did. But of course not Drew P. If Drew P was such a fine upstanding officer- and a Sargent who supervised other officers, why did he not report the others for their violation of the policy???
SeriouslySearching
12-03-2007, 07:51 PM
Sorry, SS, I thought everyone knew where we put that transcript. Thanks, Chico.Yes, Thank you...Chico!! S'OK Taxi! A good read, but nothing we didn't know. : )
SeriouslySearching
12-03-2007, 07:52 PM
If he didn't think they could prove the charge, he would have stayed and fought it out.Doesn't this go towards "credibility" that Brodsky and Drew keep preaching about other people?! LOL
SeriouslySearching
12-03-2007, 07:54 PM
Brodsky has alleged that running names of friends and relatives was something that most of the police officers did. But of course not Drew P. If Drew P was such a fine upstanding officer- and a sargent who supervised other officers, why did he not report the others for their violation of the policy???Excellent point! Since he WAS the Desk Sarge n all! He would have been there and known they were ALL doing this.
wicket
12-03-2007, 08:34 PM
Here I am waiting for the handcuffs to snap around DP and still he's out there. I am so infuriated that this man is free but I know I have to wait for all the ducks to be lined up. Going back, I remember when Laci went missing LE held press conferences, updating the public, etc. Why is this not happening? Is it because he was a member of law enforcement?
mysteriew
12-03-2007, 08:50 PM
Wicket, yes it may be because he is a member of LE. But not necessarily a bad thing. Remember that every time they release info that Drew P will have a good idea about how that affects the investigation against him. And knowing that will give him an edge, in that he has time to develop his responses to that info (and a chance to even test those responses by discussing them with friends, relatives and even media around him.) By not discussing their findings, not only is the public kept in the dark, so is DrewP. Also, it is a way of keeping the pressure on DrewP by leaking some info about him to the media- he isn't so sure of how much importance they are placing on each finding.
Trino
12-03-2007, 10:13 PM
Drew many very well be guilty of misconduct, but if his pension is stopped, it will be the kids who will suffer. If the misconduct charge is something a lot of officers do, let it be.
TGIRecovered
12-04-2007, 12:10 AM
Drew many very well be guilty of misconduct, but if his pension is stopped, it will be the kids who will suffer. If the misconduct charge is something a lot of officers do, let it be.
I don't believe that a lot of other officers do it. We are only going on Drew's word for that info, any why beleive that after all of the lies Drew has been spewing, he suddenly becomes truthful about something that happens to make someone else look bad?
I don't beieive that the current police cheif would allow such behavior to continue even if they had been doing such things under the previous cheif. Obviously there has been some significant corruption in BB in years past and not just in the PD, but higher up too. That is how Drew got away with murder in the past.
Susan
SuziQ
12-04-2007, 12:15 AM
Drew many very well be guilty of misconduct, but if his pension is stopped, it will be the kids who will suffer. If the misconduct charge is something a lot of officers do, let it be.
It's still misconduct. And Drews kids will be better taken care of than most in their situation. The two older boys have a one million dollar policy in a trust. I'm sure the kids would rather have their mothers back than to have money.
mysteriew
12-04-2007, 06:08 AM
Drew never misused police database, his lawyer claims
PETERSON CASE | Says cops routinely did personal searches
Drew Peterson never misused police databases to get information on family or friends, including a man with whom his missing wife, Stacy, traded sexually suggestive text messages, Peterson's lawyer said Monday.
On Monday, McGury said the alleged misconduct didn't involve improper computer background searches. McGury has said he planned to forward information to prosecutors for possible criminal charges.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/679601,CST-NWS-boling04a.article
Isn't that something of a contradiction? Drew P didn't do it, but it was routine to do it
The state periodically audits Law Enforcement Agencies Data System computer usage, Teppel said, and does not tolerate misuse. In fact, a dispatcher was fired in March 2006 for providing sensitive LEADS information to automobile repossessors.
If the audits turned up misuse of computers, the state could pull its service and threaten the department's existence, Teppel said.
"If you don't have access to the LEADS system," he said, "you can't be a police department."
On top of that, Teppel said Brodsky is way off base as to what police Chief Ray McGury presented to Glasgow.
"That would be part of the criminal investigation by the state police," Teppel said of the supposed allegations that Peterson misused department computers. "The state would turn that over to us.
snip: The information unearthed by state police and sent to Bolingbrook for the internal investigation is not related to Savio's death or Stacy Peterson's disappearance, Teppel said.
Police Chief Ray McGury planned to present the information from the internal investigation to the state's attorney's office, but that so far has not resulted in criminal charges against Peterson.
"There's nothing, outside the investigation (of Stacy Peterson's disappearance), the chief has brought us that warrants criminal charges," Pelkie said.
By resigning from the department, Peterson dodged an interview with internal affairs investigators. By failing to show, he was not informed of the accusations being brought, and Teppel doubted either Peterson or his attorney know what they are.
"How does Brodsky know?" the lieutenant said. "Drew refused to show up or have an attorney come in."
Confronting Peterson and demanding he answer the allegations would have made his statements inadmissible in court, Teppel explained.
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/679353,4_1_JO04_PETERSON_S1.article
So Brodsky may be fighting a battle over the wrong thing!
cheko1
12-04-2007, 07:46 AM
I think we've only seen the tip of this iceberg!
Brodsky is going to hammer away at the Chief &
the Chief is going to start swinging!!!!
I bet my money on the Chief!!!!
calidreamin
12-04-2007, 08:10 AM
I think we've only seen the tip of this iceberg!
Brodsky is going to hammer away at the Chief &
the Chief is going to start swinging!!!!
I bet my money on the Chief!!!!
Hi cheko! I think this is the tip of the iceberg too and I don't think the cheif is at all happy his department is up to it's ears in corruption. When I have seen the cheif on the news he seems like an honorable person and you can just tell that he is disgusted by all of this. jmo
DeltaDawn
12-04-2007, 11:14 AM
[quote=mysteriew;1832600]Drew never misused police database, his lawyer claims
PETERSON CASE | Says cops routinely did personal searches
Drew Peterson never misused police databases to get information on family or friends, including a man with whom his missing wife, Stacy, traded sexually suggestive text messages, Peterson's lawyer said Monday.
On Monday, McGury said the alleged misconduct didn't involve improper computer background searches. McGury has said he planned to forward information to prosecutors for possible criminal charges.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/679601,CST-NWS-boling04a.article
Has anyone heard anything definitive on what theses criminal charges are?
mysteriew
12-04-2007, 11:42 AM
Has anyone heard anything definitive on what theses criminal charges are?
I remember early on the Chief said that it was unrelated to the investigation into Stacy's disappearance. If he had run Rosotto's info that would be considered related, since they also determined that he made the call from an area near Rossoto's residence. Other than that he hasn't given any clues as to what it is.
lewielew
12-04-2007, 11:47 AM
I remember early on the Chief said that it was unrelated to the investigation into Stacy's disappearance. If he had run Rosotto's info that would be considered related, since they also determined that he made the call from an area near Rossoto's residence. Other than that he hasn't given any clues as to what it is.
this was the way to get DP fired-and he would have lost his pension because he committed a crime while on duty. and BBP may have lost access to the system.
but he resigned one day before going in front of the hearing to determine his fate-this is why the chief is irate and wants his ass
DeltaDawn
12-04-2007, 11:58 AM
I remember early on the Chief said that it was unrelated to the investigation into Stacy's disappearance. If he had run Rosotto's info that would be considered related, since they also determined that he made the call from an area near Rossoto's residence. Other than that he hasn't given any clues as to what it is.
Thank you Mysteriew I thought that I might have missed some where along the line what criminal charges the chief was discussing.
So why is Brodsky going off half cocked about this computer use for background checks..he is just giving the LEO more ammunition if you ask me.
TGIRecovered
12-04-2007, 12:05 PM
this was the way to get DP fired-and he would have lost his pension because he committed a crime while on duty. and BBP may have lost access to the system.
but he resigned one day before going in front of the hearing to determine his fate-this is why the chief is irate and wants his ass
silly me- i thought chief wanted his ass for murder but no- chief is really just mad about the LEADS.thought it would be fun to type like a cop- its quicker
susan
mysteriew
12-04-2007, 12:06 PM
Thank you Mysteriew I thought that I might have missed some where along the line what criminal charges the chief was discussing.
So why is Brodsky going off half cocked about this computer use for background checks..he is just giving the LEO more ammunition if you ask me.
Well as the Chief pointed out, Drew P didn't show up for the hearing, so evidently he doesn't know what the charges are, LOL. He must have missed it when the Chief said it was unrelated to the investigation.
lewielew
12-04-2007, 12:10 PM
Well as the Chief pointed out, Drew P didn't show up for the hearing, so evidently he doesn't know what the charges are, LOL. He must have missed it when the Chief said it was unrelated to the investigation.
chiek said if proven class 3 felony-whatever that means-i am sure the Procesutor will bring it to a grand jury soon
remember brodsky said my client never did that and later said "everyone does it when their bored, etc"
mysteriew
12-04-2007, 12:22 PM
silly me- i thought chief wanted his ass for murder but no- chief is really just mad about the LEADS.thought it would be fun to type like a cop- its quicker
susan
I think that after Stacy went missing, the Chief may have gone to persons in his department and started asking questions. And when he got the answers, he may have learned things about Drew P and something illegal. From what I am reading, actually using the leads for personal reasons isn't against the law, it is against policy. It would only be against the law if he used it against someone.
IMO, the reason the Chief is so hot to charge Drew P is partly because of the embarrassment that Drew P has brought to the department. More recently the things that Brodsky has been saying has probably made him more determined.
Speaking of which, the Chief seems pretty certain that they have enough to file charges and he supposedly sent the info to the State Attorney. So why aren't we hearing that Drew P has been arrested?
lewielew
12-04-2007, 12:28 PM
I think that after Stacy went missing, the Chief may have gone to persons in his department and started asking questions. And when he got the answers, he may have learned things about Drew P and something illegal. From what I am reading, actually using the leads for personal reasons isn't against the law, it is against policy. It would only be against the law if he used it against someone.
IMO, the reason the Chief is so hot to charge Drew P is partly because of the embarrassment that Drew P has brought to the department. More recently the things that Brodsky has been saying has probably made him more determined.
Speaking of which, the Chief seems pretty certain that they have enough to file charges and he supposedly sent the info to the State Attorney. So why aren't we hearing that Drew P has been arrested?
it is illegal-from the chiefs mouth A CLASS 3 FELONY
DeltaDawn
12-04-2007, 12:30 PM
Posted this on the Drew thread, but I'll also post here this thought.
Drew was known to be such a womanizer, could someone have come forth to file sexual misconduct charges after he retired..afraid to file them while he was still a cop? Maybe another female officer or someone who worked in the office.
mysteriew
12-04-2007, 12:45 PM
it is illegal-from the chiefs mouth A CLASS 3 FELONY
It is my understanding from what I have read that the charges he wants to file are a class three felony. But he has also said the charges are unrelated to the disappearance of Stacy and he hasn't said what kind of misconduct the charges are for.
mysteriew
12-04-2007, 12:49 PM
Drew never misused police database, his lawyer claims
PETERSON CASE | Says cops routinely did personal searches
Drew Peterson never misused police databases to get information on family or friends, including a man with whom his missing wife, Stacy, traded sexually suggestive text messages, Peterson's lawyer said Monday.
On Monday, McGury said the alleged misconduct didn't involve improper computer background searches. McGury has said he planned to forward information to prosecutors for possible criminal charges.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/679601,CST-NWS-boling04a.article
Isn't that something of a contradiction? Drew P didn't do it, but it was routine to do it
The state periodically audits Law Enforcement Agencies Data System computer usage, Teppel said, and does not tolerate misuse. In fact, a dispatcher was fired in March 2006 for providing sensitive LEADS information to automobile repossessors.
If the audits turned up misuse of computers, the state could pull its service and threaten the department's existence, Teppel said.
"If you don't have access to the LEADS system," he said, "you can't be a police department."
On top of that, Teppel said Brodsky is way off base as to what police Chief Ray McGury presented to Glasgow.
"That would be part of the criminal investigation by the state police," Teppel said of the supposed allegations that Peterson misused department computers. "The state would turn that over to us.
snip: The information unearthed by state police and sent to Bolingbrook for the internal investigation is not related to Savio's death or Stacy Peterson's disappearance, Teppel said.
Police Chief Ray McGury planned to present the information from the internal investigation to the state's attorney's office, but that so far has not resulted in criminal charges against Peterson.
"There's nothing, outside the investigation (of Stacy Peterson's disappearance), the chief has brought us that warrants criminal charges," Pelkie said.
By resigning from the department, Peterson dodged an interview with internal affairs investigators. By failing to show, he was not informed of the accusations being brought, and Teppel doubted either Peterson or his attorney know what they are.
"How does Brodsky know?" the lieutenant said. "Drew refused to show up or have an attorney come in."
Confronting Peterson and demanding he answer the allegations would have made his statements inadmissible in court, Teppel explained.
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/679353,4_1_JO04_PETERSON_S1.article
So Brodsky may be fighting a battle over the wrong thing!
Bringing this forward
cricket
12-04-2007, 12:54 PM
Drew many very well be guilty of misconduct, but if his pension is stopped, it will be the kids who will suffer. If the misconduct charge is something a lot of officers do, let it be.
I'm not so worried about the kids financially. DP probably had life insurance on Stacy and it would go to the kids if he is convicted of murdering her. Plus, the children would probably get Social Security Survivor's benefits. Since she adopted his children from KS marriabge, they would probably also qualify for her survivor benefits.
SuziQ
12-04-2007, 01:47 PM
lol, true. They have 29 years worth to follow up on!
TGIRecovered
12-04-2007, 01:50 PM
lewie-pls don't make me puke- this is not your dispatch screen you are typing on it is WS so pls leave the itchy parts in the squad.thx-susan
TGIRecovered
12-04-2007, 02:04 PM
Is anyone else having trouble with the smileys? I can't get them to work!
Tom'sGirl
12-04-2007, 02:10 PM
Is anyone else having trouble with the smileys? I can't get them to work!
Check :crazy: check :crazy: ............mine are working TGIR
SeriouslySearching
12-04-2007, 02:10 PM
Ewww Lew!
Lemme guess, Taxi....you needed the puking smiley?! LOL
JerzWhim
12-04-2007, 02:11 PM
Is anyone else having trouble with the smileys? I can't get them to work!
:crazy::clap::dance::hand:
Testing. Testing smileys from MAC at work.
TGIRecovered
12-04-2007, 02:26 PM
:confused: :confused: :confused: :hand: :sick: :silenced:
:blowkiss: Guess it was me, thanks guys!
Leila
12-04-2007, 04:13 PM
Thank you Mysteriew I thought that I might have missed some where along the line what criminal charges the chief was discussing.
So why is Brodsky going off half cocked about this computer use for background checks..he is just giving the LEO more ammunition if you ask me.
Brodsky is reacting to this article that appeared in the local newspapers yesterday about doing unauthorized background checks. But it would appear that this might be just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=5810272
DP knows what he's done, he's been caught, and he knows they've got him, so he resigned in order to protect his pension and to stop the investigation from going forward. But, it appears the police chief is going forward with this by forwarding what they have to the prosecutor.
Last night on Greta Van Susteran, Chief McGury was on and after Joel Brodsky made the statement that his client did nothing wrong, that all policemen in the dept. were using the computers to do personal background checks, Chief McGury demanded that Joel Brodsky send him a list of all Bolingbrook police officers that were using the system to do personal background searches.
Greta also cornered Joel Brodsky in regards to a time line - where was his client on Sunday, October 28th into the early morning hours of October 29? She's going to pursue this and I think there will be more tonight.
Bigfoot
12-04-2007, 04:42 PM
I was glad to see Chief McGury get all fired up and defending his department. He was really snapping, good for him. What a nightmare. Brodsky is a a good match for DP.
Littledeer
12-04-2007, 05:41 PM
I've talked to a couple of Chief's locally, and they are all 100% behind Chief McGury. When I asked why, they all gave the same first reason. ANY POLICE OFFICER THAT MAKES A MOCKERY OF OUT THEIR DEPARTMENT, had better have done so with a squeaky clean background while they were there as a police officer. (they think DP should have been gone long ago with what has come out so far)
Also, the LEADS is available to all police officers and the dispatcher and they all have a policy on the use. First and foremost, it is ONLY TO BE USED FOR OFFICIAL POLICE BUSINESS. However, one or more did say that it had been used for "personal" reasons, like checking on older children or doing a favor for a friend. However, for Brodsky to say that all police officers do it nightly, is just another "pinnochio" lie according to them as they would not tolerate it from their officers.
cricket
12-04-2007, 05:53 PM
........Also, the LEADS is available to all police officers and the dispatcher and they all have a policy on the use. First and foremost, it is ONLY TO BE USED FOR OFFICIAL POLICE BUSINESS. However, one or more did say that it had been used for "personal" reasons, like checking on older children or doing a favor for a friend. However, for Brodsky to say that all police officers do it nightly, is just another "pinnochio" lie according to them as they would not tolerate it from their officers.
Littledeer - I think you are right that it is against police policy to use it for personal reasons (e.g., to checkout a daughter's boyfriend), but it becomes against the law when you take the info and use it against someone or give it to someone else. The example he used was that the BBPD fired a dispatcher last year for looking up info in LEADS and then "giving" the info to a repo man. I put giving in quotes because he may have sold the info - but either way - passing the info on to an unauthorized person is proabably what's against the law.
mysteriew
12-04-2007, 06:05 PM
The thing is the Chief denys that that is what the misconduct is, and he says it isn't related to the investigation into Stacy's disappearance.
It is possible that he is denying it in order to keep Brodsky and Drew P on edge, but at this point all we have is the Chief's denial.
Littledeer
12-04-2007, 06:16 PM
cricket:
snip
against the law when you take the info and use it against someone snip
So your saying the Chief can have charges pressed against DP because he used LEADS to sell the info, or possibly pressure someone to do something, because he found information on them from the LEADS system???
I agree totally with that. I was just trying to show how other area police chiefs are thinking about this case only on my question of how they felt about Chief McGury and the latest information about DP possibly illegally using the LEADS system.
SuziQ
12-06-2007, 10:20 AM
The I-Team has also been told by investigators that state police seized the Oakbrook department personnel files of two of Peterson's closest friends on the force. One recently resigned while under investigation for professional misconduct. The other was recently terminated for lying and unauthorized access of criminal files.
That is the same allegation that sources say Drew Peterson is facing in Bolingbrook - the sale of criminal records.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/iteam&id=5817217
ISPTRAX
12-06-2007, 10:21 AM
The I-Team has also been told by investigators that state police seized the Oakbrook department personnel files of two of Peterson's closest friends on the force. One recently resigned while under investigation for professional misconduct. The other was recently terminated for lying and unauthorized access of criminal files.
That is the same allegation that sources say Drew Peterson is facing in Bolingbrook - the sale of criminal records.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/iteam&id=5817217
WHOA!!!! The crapola's hitting the fan!!!!!!
DeltaDawn
12-06-2007, 10:27 AM
The I-Team has also been told by investigators that state police seized the Oakbrook department personnel files of two of Peterson's closest friends on the force. One recently resigned while under investigation for professional misconduct. The other was recently terminated for lying and unauthorized access of criminal files.
That is the same allegation that sources say Drew Peterson is facing in Bolingbrook - the sale of criminal records.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/iteam&id=5817217
Wonder what RMUCHA will have to say about this../ I'd be interested in hearing his side of this incident.
SuziQ
12-06-2007, 10:33 AM
I could almost excuse snooping on a guy your daughter is dating or something like that. But selling criminal records???? Who were they all selling criminal records to? Most of that stuff is available online through a paid data base anyways, isn't it?
Taximom
12-06-2007, 10:49 AM
This certainly explains a lot of the assets Drew owns.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
0