|
|
|
| NEWS > 18 February 2006 |
Other related articles:
Canada: Former Ontario police
Amid a bizarre, almost circus-like atmosphere, Duncan RCMP arrested former Cornwall, Ont., police officer Perry Dunlop yesterday as about 75 supporters looked on.
"You're our hero!" and "We love you, Perry!" came shouts from the crowd as Dunlop walked arm-in-arm with his wife, Helen, to the squad car at the end of their driveway.
The RCMP were executing a Canada-wide warrant issued last month for Dunlop, 43, who has refused to testify at a Cornwall sex-abuse inquiry.
After an hour-long rally, in which Perry and Helen Dunlop as well as their three daughters painted th... Read more
|
 Article sourced from
|
|
NorthJersey.com - Hackensack,
18 February 2006
This article appeared in the above title/site.
To view it in its entirity click this link.
|
|
Super Bowl pool run by state p
In the days leading up to the 2005 Super Bowl, troopers inside the state police barracks in Bloomfield were busy running their own football gambling pool.
At least 34 troopers placed cash bets -- more than half of the officers assigned to the barracks.
The station's commanding officer took decisive action after spotting a sign advertising the pool next to a sergeant's desk: He placed his own bet and eventually won $100, according to an internal report of the incident obtained by The Record.
The agency's recent charges against an illegal sports-betting ring allegedly operated by a state trooper and a National Hockey League coach attracted international media attention, but the Bloomfield barracks pool shows that the state police have been struggling with other types of legal, on-the-job gambling.
Running a bookmaking operation where the ringleader makes a profit is illegal in New Jersey, but wagering on sporting events, such as football pools, is legal as long as no one takes a "cut," or a percentage of the winnings.
However, allowing police officers to bet while on duty and inside a government building is way out of step with the world of American police agencies.
"It's totally inappropriate conduct for a law-enforcement officer to engage in, and it casts a very bad image on the entire department," said Hubert Williams, president of the Police Foundation, a Washington, D.C-based institute that studies issues of police integrity and professionalism.
"It brings on the officers an aura of disrespect -- you lose your status and moral authority with the public," he said.
A sampling of state police and highway patrol agencies in New York, Michigan, Nebraska, Texas, Idaho and California found that state troopers and officers in those states are strictly prohibited from participating in all forms of sports betting pools while on duty.
The same is true in Nevada, which has the nation's most permissive attitude toward betting. The Nevada Highway Patrol's policy states: "Officers shall not engage in legal gambling while in uniform or while on duty."
Betting not condoned
Capt. Al Della Fave, a New Jersey State Police spokesman, said the agency does not condone last year's betting pool at the Bloomfield barracks, which houses troopers who patrol the Garden State Parkway. He did not know if Col. Rick Fuentes, the state police superintendent, had been briefed on the incident.
"The superintendent concurs that gambling on duty is inappropriate behavior for a law-enforcement person," Della Fave said. "If anybody is caught gambling on duty in the future, the Division of State Police -- based on the parameters of that incident -- will take appropriate action."
It was not until last week that Fuentes issued a directive barring New Jersey troopers from engaging in any type of gambling while on duty. The order was issued shortly after the agency announced criminal charges against Trooper James Harney and Rick Tocchet, an associate coach of the NHL's Phoenix Coyotes.
Some gamblers placed their bets by calling Harney's cellphone while he patrolled the New Jersey Turnpike in his police cruiser, officials said. Attorneys for both men said their clients had done nothing wrong and vowed to fight the charges.
State police detectives suspect that Janet Jones, an actress married to former hockey superstar Wayne Gretzky, placed bets with the ring, sources said.
There are major differences, however, between the Harney case and what happened inside the Bloomfield barracks. For one, no officer made a profit from the Super Bowl pool.
Williams said it is improper for law-enforcement officers to be betting on the job, even if it is legal.
State police commanders who learned of the Bloomfield Super Bowl pool should have sent a clear signal that betting conduct was not appropriate in a law-enforcement setting, he said.
"Whenever you have a situation like this going on, management has to rise to the occasion," Williams said. "You have to have some consequences for this kind of behavior."
After receiving a complaint about the Bloomfield betting pool, state police commanders referred the matter to an investigator assigned to Troop E, which is responsible for the Parkway, according to the state police report.
The investigator quickly established that troopers had begun placing bets in a Super Bowl gambling pool one week before the Philadelphia Eagles faced the New England Patriots in Jacksonville on Feb. 6, 2005.
The thrust of the investigation then turned to the question of whether signs advertising the betting pool and an envelope containing cash bets were visible to the public from the station's front desk.
The trooper who filed the complaint about the pool said the betting boxes were situated next to the sergeant's desk, "in close proximity of the front window at the station," the report says.
In fact, the Bloomfield barracks commander was "aware that the posting of a Super Bowl pool in view of the public would be inappropriate," the report says. The internal report does not explain why a betting pool hidden from the public was preferable to a pool conducted behind closed doors.
The report concluded that the pool was not illegal and did not violate state police regulations at the time.
Della Fave said that during their interviews with the investigator, all of the troopers were counseled against participating in betting pools.
The Troop E commanding officer agreed on May 31, 2005 that no further disciplinary action should be taken against those participating in the pool. A supervisor assigned to the state police internal affairs division concurred a week later.
Speaking in his defense earlier during the internal probe, the station commander said he did not think the pool violated the agency's rule banning card playing.
"Card playing requires you to sit down at a desk and spend numerous amounts of time playing cards," the Bloomfield commander said, according to the report. "[The pool] was a very quick pick, and I don't believe there is any correlation between the two."
|
| |
 EiP Comments:
|
|---|
|
| |
* We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper or periodical. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and we will remove the article. The articles republished on this site are provided for the purposes of research , private study, criticism , review, and the reporting of current events' We have no wish to infringe the copyright of any newspaper , periodical or other works. If you feel that we have done so then please contact us with the details and where necessary we will remove the work concerned.
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
 |
Ethics in Policing, based in the UK, provide information and advice about the following:
Policing Research | Police News articles | Police Corruption | International Policing | Police Web Sites | Police Forum | Policing Ethics | Police Journals | Police Publications |
|
| |
|
