Tag Archives: F.O.P.

NOPD Police Sergeant 2021

Posted on by
3

When Michael Harrison was Superintendent of the New Orleans Police Department, the Mayor’s Innovation Department at City Hall worked with Chief Harrison to come up with a new plan designed to bring the Civil Service promotion system into “modern times.” Mayor Landrieu had already managed to ditch the banded lists the New Orleans Police Department had been using successfully for years. The banded lists were the result of a consent decree in a federal discrimination complaint. So, convinced that we no longer needed protections from discrimination, favoritism, and whatever ism’s you can come up with, Mayor Landrieu branded the Civil Service Department’s exam as “falsely objective” and replaced all of the Civil Service Commissioners until the Commission agreed with him. Thus we have the Great Place to Work Initiative.

In the past 24 hours, I have heard numerous people say that they did not understand how the NOPD is switching the list around when that was the purview of the Civil Service Department. This is not exactly true. The Civil Service Department is responsible for administering the test and preparing a list of eligible candidates. The Appointing Authority is responsible for selecting candidates for promotion. The Superintendent of Police is the Appointing Authority for the New Orleans Police Department. The Civil Service Rules, which have the force and effect of law, allow for selection of anyone who passed the exam. Of course, they have to be selected pursuant to La. Const. Art. 10, Sec. 7, which states that appointments have to be made “under a general system based upon merit, efficiency, fitness, and length of service…”

When Michael Harrison was Superintendent, he just chose whoever he wanted from the list of eligibles, regardless of their position on the list. I filed “appeals” pursuant to Civil Service Rule VI, Sec. 6.1 on behalf of three candidates for Police Lieutenant who had been passed over for promotion and I was able to make the case that the people that had been promoted ahead of my three candidates had not be selected based upon merit, efficiency, fitness, and length of service. Shortly thereafter, Chief Harrison left for Baltimore and Shaun Ferguson was selected to replace him. Chief Ferguson decided he was going to make promotions by going down the Civil Service list in order. Not to be undone, the Innovation Squad finally convinced the CAO to enact a policy that would guide promotions in the New Orleans Police Department. That policy can be found in CAO Policy Memo 143(R). The application of CAO Policy Memo 143(R) is how the Civil Service list has become a new, re-ordered list.

Is this legal?

Maybe. La. Const. Art. X, Sec. 7 states “The number (of candidates) to be certified shall not be less than three; however, if more than one vacancy is to be filled, the name of one additional eligible for each vacancy may be certified.” I believe this means that there has to be three candidates certified unless there is more than one position to be filled, in which case there will be more than three candidates certified — there will be one additional candidate certified per extra position to be filled. Apparently, I am in the minority in my belief. The Innovation Squad believes that where this line states the number of candidates to be certified “shall not be less than three” means three candidates can be certified or 103 candidates can be certified.

Certification of candidates is the Civil Service Department’s job as it relates to promotions. The Appointing Authority selects candidates from those that are certified by the Personnel Director (Civil Service Department).

So, if “the number to be certified shall not be less than three” means three or 103, then the Personnel Director can certify everyone who passed the test and then it is up to the Appointing Authority to make promotions in a constitutional manner (on the basis of merit, efficiency, fitness, and length of service). The Innovation Squad decided that Appointing Authorities throughout the City would certainly be able to select candidates for promotion in a constitutional manner. They remained undeterred by the clear evidence that Chief Harrison’s administration did not even try to make constitutional promotions. Harrison’s administration just picked whoever they wanted for reasons absolutely nobody could explain (at least not under oath at the Civil Service evidentiary hearing).

CAO Policy Memorandum 143(R) was introduced because they definitely were not going to return to the banded lists that were put into place to deter discrimination, favoritism, nepotism, and the other ism’s. In addition to the Innovation Unit, the Business Council of New Orleans, led by Coleman D. Ridley, Jr., a native of Newport News, Virginia, also thought they knew best how to make promotions within the New Orleans Police Department. Why the Business Council is interested in how the NOPD makes promotions is beyond me. I really don’t understand why the CAO wants to micromanage promotions in the NOPD either. This is not a good look on either the CAO or the Business Council.

My new position on the list is unacceptable. What can I do?

When Walter Powers, Claude Schlesinger, and I met with Chief Ferguson, the Deputy Chiefs, the Chief of Staff, and the City Attorneys advising them on this topic, Chief Ferguson stated that he would entertain anyone who believes that their new ranking was the result of some type of mistake. So, that could be the first thing to do. You can contact the Superintendent’s Office and tell them that you think there has been a mistake and you would like to discuss it with whoever is handling those complaints.

Once promotions are made, you may be able to use Civil Service Rule VI, Sec. 6.1 to challenge being skipped for someone else. However, application of that rule may or may not lead to a better result. Use of Rule VI, Sec. 6.1 is not an option until after promotion have actually been made from the list and you have actually been passed over.

At the meeting mentioned above a couple of weeks ago, Chief Ferguson stated in no uncertain terms that he was committed to transparency. He said that the NOPD would provide me with whatever documentation I wanted pending an official request. Well, I submitted an official request for all of the Promotion Committee documentation a couple of days ago. I received a reply to that request from the Chief of Staff who indicated that he was in the process of assembling the requested documentation. Once I have all that documentation, it should be clearer what process was used to move some candidates 20-30 positions from their ranking on the Civil Service list to make a new order to the Sergeants List.

Once all the requested information is received, we will be in a better position to determine what, if anything, can be done about how the list was shaken up.

If you can, shoot me an email that says what your new place is on the Sergeants List. I will be keeping a close eye on everything that transpires with regard to the promotions to Police Sergeant.

No Win Situations in New Orleans

Posted on by
1

Save the below video for later. As you can see, the video is marked as age restricted and can only be viewed on YouTube where you can assert that you are old enough to watch. The video is a news report by WWL Investigative Reporter Mike Perlstein. You have probably already seen it. If you haven’t seen it, be sure to watch it.

I pride myself on staying in touch with the rank and file officers of the New Orleans Police Department. I talk to officers every single day in one way or another. 90% of NOPD officers are members of the Fraternal Order of Police. So, I know that I will be addressing FOP members, no matter who I am speaking to.

Recently, I happened to be at a district station at roll call time. As I stated above, I try to talk to officers at every opportunity. Since roll call was just getting started, I joined the group of officers getting ready to start their tour of duty. As usual, I popped in, made sure everyone knew who I was, and asked if there was anything in particular they wanted to talk about. That particular day, they were concerned about recent revisions to the NOPD policy on searches and seizures. I bring this up as a good example of the type of “no win situation” I referred to in Mike Perlstein’s story.

In particular, officers were worried about the addition of paragraph 58 of Chapter 1.2.4 on Search and Seizure. This addition is found in the section addressing strip searches. One of the officers had recently attended in service training and had been told that the new policy makes any search that touches the skin of the person searched a strip search. Strip searches are a no-win situation at NOPD.

First, I would refer to the definition of Strip Search found in the policy. A Strip Search is defined as “any search of a person that includes the remove all or rearrangement of some or all clothing to permit visual inspection of the exterior of the suspect’s groin/genital area, buttocks, female breasts, or undergarments covering these areas.” The intent to conduct a visual inspection seems to be a necessary element of a strip search, but my personal experience is that no visual inspection is necessary in any form, Searches where officers have intentionally avoided any possibility of a visual inspection have been declared strip searches.

Paragraph 62 of the policy outlines the steps that officers have to take in order to conduct a strip search. As you can see, there are numerous steps that would be time consuming. That is fine because strip searches are rare and officers should have to dot every i and cross every t when conducting a strip search. One way or another, conducting strip searches regularly is not practical or necessary. Paragraph 58 of the policy potentially changes all that.

Searches are a daily occurrence for police officers. Policy requires that every arrested subject be searched. Every time someone rides in a police car, they must be searched before they are put in the car. On June 20, 20215, Officer Daryle Holloway was killed in the line of duty by an arrested subject who had managed to get a gun into the back of the police car. In spite of being handcuffed behind his back, Officer Holloway’s assailant managed to shoot and kill him. Searching arrested subjects is serious business that is absolutely necessary for everyone’s safety. Paragraph 58 places all of that in jeopardy.

Under the section heading of Strip Search, paragraph 58 states that “Unless the requirements for a strip search outlined below are met (paragraph 62), officer may not: (a) reach inside outer clothing and touch skin or underwear, especially in the groin, genital, and buttock/anal region; (b) manipulate items inside outer clothing which may be in direct contact with skin especially in the groin, genital, and buttock/anal region to recover an item or move them into open view; or (c) require someone to remove or rearrange some or all clothing to permit visual inspection of a person’s groin/genital area, buttocks, female breasts, or undergarments covering those areas.”

First, I think the policy already covered part c of paragraph 58. The other two parts, a and b above, make routine searches against policy. These are the types of searches that officers conduct every day. The searches that are required by policy. There is simply no way that officers will be able to comply with the requirements of paragraph 62 every time they have to conduct a search subsequent to arrest before placing an arrested subject in a car for transport. Sometimes arrested subjects have to be placed in the car more than once. For example, if an arrested subject has to be taken to the hospital before going to the lock up, that arrested subject would have to be searched before the trip to the hospital and then again before the trip to the lockup. The waistband is one of the first places officers are taught to search. That however would require officers to “reach inside outer clothing and touch skin or underwear…” So, to conduct routine searches before placing an arrested subject in the rear of a police car, officers have to (1) obtain written authorization from his or her supervisor; (2) be properly trained in strip searches; (3) have and use personal protective equipment; (4) perform the search under conditions that provide privacy from all but those authorized to conduct the search – wait, what? The arrested subject has to be transported to a private area before being able to conduct the search that allows them to be transported in a police car? If that isn’t a no-win situation, I don’t know what one is.

Of course, the policy won’t be enforced unless there is some other reason to enforce it. If there is a complaint or someone happens to watch the body worn video, then it will become an issue. Otherwise, officers will have to continue conducting searches. If they stop conducting searches, officers will get hurt. I will again refer to Officer Holloway. It will happen again.

At the roll call I attended, I told officers to do what they had to do to get home safely at the end of the day. Officers should not have to wonder whether or not they can do something that is designed to protect them. The changes to this policy create more confusion and uncertainty. The searches described in paragraph 58 do not necessarily meet the definition of a strip search. However, they are found in the strip search section. When do these instructions apply? Beats me. What I do know is that the number 1 rule is to make it home safely. Make it home safely. If you get dinged for making it home safely, I will be there with you to fight the good fight. The FOP will also be there with you to fight the good fight.

2021 NOPD Captain’s Exam

Posted on by
Reply

The Crescent City Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police is working on putting together a prep class for the upcoming NOPD Captain’s Exam. That being said, time is short. We expect the test to be given in August of this year, which doesn’t leave us much time to schedule prep classes. We will certainly share the information with everyone once the dates and locations are cemented. In the meantime, below are videos created with Capt. Louis Dabdoub. Louie’s method is tried and true and will benefit anyone who is able to put his method to use. Each time NOPD has given a promotion exam and we have arranged for Louie to give this class, I have compared the list of attendees with the promotional register. I don’t have a solid statistical survey that could be introduced in court or anything, but I can assure you that the vast majority of people who took Louie’s class finished on the top of each list. In other words, there were only 2 or 3 people in the top 25 of each list who did not attend Louie’s lectures.

Here are the videos:

Capt. Louis Dabdoub’s promotional exam methodology.
Capt. Louis Dabdoub’s promotional exam methodology (Part 1 of 2).
Capt. Louis Dabdoub’s promotional exam methodology (Part 2 of 2).

Download Louie’s worksheet here.

NOPD Update 4/6/21

Posted on by
Reply

The following went out via NOPDALL on April 6, 2021:

——-

Subject: NOPD Short Forms 

Members of the Department,

IAPro is now able to generate NOPD Short Forms. Attached is a “Request for Public Integrity Bureau Short Form” (NOPD Form 355), please complete the form in its entirety and send a scanned copy to pibshortforms@nola.gov. The request will be completed within 48 hours after receiving the emailed request (excluding weekends and holidays).

*Any incomplete forms will delay the request.

Feel free to contact me with any question or concern.

Sincerely,

Sergeant Omar Garcia

Public Integrity Bureau

——-

Form 355 can be downloaded here.

I recommend checking you short form periodically to make sure you are aware of what it says and to make sure it is accurate. You certainly need to check your short form if you are considering leaving NOPD. The last thing you need is to inadvertently leave while “under investigation.” It happens more often than you imagine.

Call me if you have any questions about this or if you have any questions about your short form – sometimes they aren’t the easiest to interpret.

Police Reform Legislation

Posted on by
Reply

Legislators on the State and Federal levels clearly have qualified immunity in their crosshairs. Click here for info on Federal legislation from National FOP President Pat Yoes. There are other things the reformers are gunning for, but weakening qualified immunity for law enforcement officers seems to be a major goal. It is important to recognize that the “reforms” to qualified immunity will still apply to all other public officers as it has always been. In other words, the Legislators proposing and voting on this legislation will still be able to benefit from from qualified immunity, as will all other public officers exercising the discretionary functions of their office.

I would like to start by saying that Legislators are gunning for the wrong thing. Qualified immunity only relates to civil lawsuits alleging Constitutional violations. Qualified immunity does not apply to criminal matters.

In Louisiana, lawmakers have proposed that qualified immunity would not be available to law enforcement officers for any wrongful death or injury resulting from a use of force. In those cases, the trier of fact would have to decide if the use of force leading to the lawsuit was unreasonable. If the judge decides it is unreasonable, then the lawsuit would be allowed to continue.

Contrast that with the current way qualified immunity is applied. There is a two-prong test to determine if a public officer is entitled to qualified immunity: 1) Did the public officer’s actions actually constitute a violation of the plaintiff’s Constitutional rights? 2) Was the public officer on notice that his actions constituted a violation of someone’s Constitutional rights? If the answer to both of those questions is yes, then qualified immunity does not apply. If the answer to either of those questions is no, then the lawsuit will be dismissed as to that public officer.

From the standpoint of law enforcement officers, the current application of qualified immunity serves to protect them from civil lawsuits in a profession that is dangerous and often leads to tense, rapidly evolving circumstances where the lives of law enforcement officers and civilians are in danger. A Tulane University Police Officer and Deputy Constable, Martinus Mitchum, was killed on February 26. 2021 when he intervened in a dispute over wearing a mask at a basketball game. Let that sink in. The shooter wanted to be allowed in the gym during a basketball game and was refused entry because he was not wearing a mask. When the interaction became contentious, Officer Mitchum stepped in to de-escalate the situation. In spite of Officer Mitchum’s efforts, the individual was so interested in not wearing a mask at the basketball game that he pulled a gun and shot and killed Officer Mitchum. It is a dangerous profession.

Other reform legislation includes bans in choke holds, bans on no-knock warrant service, and restrictions on the time of day warrants can be served. I don’t object to those efforts except to say that when someone’s life is in legitimate peril, all options should be on the table. Actually, this legislative efforts are much more reasonable than attacks on qualified immunity.

With regard to qualified immunity, I will point out that I am unaware of any insurance product that would provide liability insurance for law enforcement officers. Elimination of qualified immunity, even under restricted circumstances, would expose law enforcement officers to the same type of civil exposure that doctors are exposed to. As we all know, one reason we pay so much to see the doctor is because the doctor has to pay expensive insurance premiums. The problem is that I am unaware of any insurance product available to law enforcement officers and law enforcement salaries have historically been low.

Without qualified immunity, I think I would have to question the sanity of anyone choosing to work in law enforcement – at least a law enforcement agency without qualified immunity. In his monthly podcast, noted public safety attorney Will Aitchison said that taking a law enforcement job without qualified immunity should be the equivalent of failing the psych exam.

Legislators should be focusing on banning chokeholds. NOPD has banned chokeholds for years and it has had a good result. Changing qualified immunity will have unforeseen consequences that will damage law enforcement forever. Law enforcement officers are not the 1%. Law enforcement officers are blue collar workers who live next door to you. Their kids go to school with your kids. They are much more likely to be able to relate with you than with the 1%. In addition, law enforcement officers are not the ones setting policy within police departments. Those policies are being set and implemented by elected officials and people appointed by those elected officials. When the Dept. of Justice sought to implement a consent decree in New Orleans, the consent decree did not contain mandates for each individual police officer. The consent decree contains mandates for the administration. That is because the administration is responsible for how law enforcement officers perform their jobs.

I am not sure changing qualified immunity for law enforcement officers only will be Constitutional. We are entitled to equal treatment under the law. One way or another, legislators need to keep their eye on the ball and prop up law enforcement so that the profession can best serve their respective communities. Legislators should NOT be taking actions that will forever damage law enforcement as a profession.

All law enforcement officers and those individuals supporting law enforcement should contact their elected officials and let them know that you do not support elimination of qualified immunity for law enforcement officers in any way. Emails, letters, and/or phone calls can be used to serve that purpose. Don’t be shy. This is extremely important.

NOPD Inspection

Posted on by
1

On August 18, 2020, N.O.P.D. Sergeant Kevin Seuzeneau sent an NOPDALL email reminding everyone about N.O.P.D. Rule 2, Moral Conduct, Paragraph 1, Adherence to Law. Why would he do that? Doesn’t everyone already know that police officers have to comply with the law? Sure we do.

Sgt. Seuzeneau also reminds everyone that there will be a department-wide inspection coming soon. He follows that up with some municipal traffic ordinances police officers in New Orleans are also familiar with. There are probably plenty of officers who have never experienced a department-wide inspection while employed by NOPD, but this is a good time to prepare.

Sgt. Seuzeneau included the municipal ordinances on driver’s licenses, vehicle registration, license plates, etc. These ordinances are included because these are the things they will be checking. You will likely be asked to produce your driver’s license. They will also check to make sure those licenses are valid. Is your driver’s license suspended because of a dispute with the State of Louisiana over taxes? That is a sustained violation. No license on person? Sustained.

They will also check the cars out in the parking lot. The cars should have license plates affixed to the rear number – not on the rear deck. The registration should be readily available. The brake tag should be valid and there should be valid insurance.

All of these potentially sustained violations are avoidable. Take Sgt. Seuzeneau’s advice and use his email as a checklist. It is not worth the hassle of being sustained for R2P1. If it happens, feel free to call me.

Social Media and Law Enforcement Today

Posted on by
Reply

Will Aitchison is an attorney in Portland, Oregon. Will has been involved in representing police officers, police organizations, as well as cities and police departments. Recently, Will published a podcast titled “Ten Rules for Police Officer Social Media Posts.” You can listen to the podcast by clicking here. Will’s 10 rules are worth sharing. Here they are:

  1. Your 1st Amendment rights are limited. You are not going to win by relying on your 1st Amendment rights.
  2. Just because something is an internet meme does not mean you should repost it. If you repost it, then you own it. It is the same as if it came straight from your mouth.
  3. Nothing you post is private. While you should check your privacy settings, anything can be forwarded or screen-shotted.
  4. Before you post, ask yourself “How will my employer react to this post?” If the answer is that they will be annoyed or it will lead to an investigation or discipline, then you should ask yourself if it is worth it. I think if you have to ask if it is worth it, just don’t do it.
  5. Confine posts to purely positive posts — posts that don’t have anything to do with the current law enforcement environment.
  6. Will says if you are in doubt about a post, wait 24 hours – sleep on it. Or you can ask a respected senior officer what they think. Again, I say if you are in doubt, don’t post it.
  7. Think – Who are your online “friends?” Are they a tight-knit group? Or do you have “friends” who live on the other side of the country that you do not know? This relates to #3. Nothing is private.
  8. Can someone figure out that you are a police officer from your profile or some other source? If so, you will be treated as if you posted as a police officer.
  9. Brady says any evidence of discriminatory conduct or bias must be turned over to the defense. Is your post evidence of discriminatory conduct or bias?
  10. Before you post or comment, think about your safety and the safety of your job, family, etc. People will find you.

There have been a couple of disciplinary cases here in New Orleans. These are cases that can be prevented. Think before you click post.

Update to Emergency Rate of Pay May 27, 2020

Posted on by
Reply

Listen to my discussion with Tommy Tucker on WWL radio this morning regarding the Emergency Rate of Pay:

Listen to Aaron MIschler’s discussion with Tommy Tucker on WWL radio this morning regarding the Emergency Rate of Pay. Aaron Mischler is President of IAFF Local 632 – the Firefighter’s Union. Aaron has been a good partner in seeking the Emergency Rate of Pay.

Emergency Rate of Pay Hearing

Posted on by
3

On Monday, May 18 at 10:00 a.m., the New Orleans Civil Service Commission will be meeting. The Commission will be considering my request regarding the Emergency Rate of Pay found in Rule 4, Sec. 11.1. You can attend the meeting using Zoom or on the telephone (213-787-0529 meeting 888712). If you want to make a comment on the matter, you can do so by completing a comment form and emailing it to csno@nola.gov. The Emergency Rate of Pay is item 3 on the agenda. It is really the only substantive item on the agenda. This is only for employees under the jurisdiction of the New Orleans Civil Service Commission.

On April 22, I posted about the Emergency Rate of Pay. Click here to download the arguments I provided to the Civil Service Commission. Click here to download Civil Service Rule IV, Sec. 11.1, Emergency Rate of Pay.

I would encourage anyone who thinks police officers, firefighters, and EMS employees should be getting the Emergency Rate of Pay to submit a comment form.

Civil Service Rule IV, Sec. 11.1 states that when the Mayor declares a state of emergency and the Mayor has “requested only essential employees report to work” then those employees are paid at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate. Review this document for a more in-depth discussion.

The argument against paying the emergency rate of pay is that there have been non-essential employees working during the state of emergency. This is splitting hairs.

One group of employees was told to report to work as usual. The second group of employees was told they could go home. Some of those employees were allowed to work from home and some were carried civil leave. The March 22 CAO Circular Memo on Limited Operations laid out what employees should do effective March 23.

No matter what you call the two groups of employees, one is reporting to work and one is not. Each time the Emergency Rate of Pay has been effective, that has been the case. In my mind, the only question is whether or not the working-at-home group of employees are part of the essential group or the non-essential group. I believe “report to work” entails physically reporting to work. Employees get an Emergency Rate of Pay because they are exposed to the dangers associated with the state of emergency. Finally, we know that police officers were exposed to the risks created by the coronavirus.

Again, review this memo for a more in-depth review of the Emergency Rate of Pay issues. You can also review this post to review the issues. Finally, I encourage everyone to participate in the Civil Service Commission on Monday, May 18 at 10:00 a.m. I also encourage everyone to complete a comment form and submit it via email to CSNO@NOLA.GOV. Call me with any questions.

NOPD Update – Disciplinary Hearings

Posted on by
Reply

Back in March, when the City told non-essential employees to either stay at home or to work from home, the NOPD decided to suspend holding disciplinary hearings due to the potential for sharing the virus which has been plaguing us for all of 2020. Exceptions were made for some who were looking to retire, but, for the most part, there have not been any disciplinary hearings conducted since mid-March. Effective May 16, that is going to change.

On May 16, NOPD will begin holding disciplinary hearings again. On May 16, there will be about 2 months’ worth of disciplinary hearings that have not been conducted. Therefore, there will be a backlog of hearings – probably quite a few hearings.

If you have had a sustained disciplinary investigation, but have not had a disciplinary hearing it might be coming sooner than later.

If you have been issued a “Disciplinary Hearing Notification,” then you should call me so that I can put it on my calendar.

If you have been issued NOPD Form 308, the investigator’s recommended disposition, then you are welcome to call. But the NOPD will not be holding a disciplinary hearing on the date indicated on NOPD Form 308.

Why should you call me about your disciplinary hearing?

I have represented officers in more than 1,000 disciplinary hearings.

Since 90% of NOPD officers are members of the Fraternal Order of Police, and, therefore, the FOP Legal Defense Plan, it is safe for me to assume you are an FOP member.

Most NOPD officers have little to no experience with disciplinary hearings.

I can usually answer whatever questions an officer has about disciplinary hearings. I can give you a good idea of what to expect.

If you think you might want to appeal to the Civil Service Commission, it is helpful for me to attend the disciplinary hearings.

If you do not think there is any point in appealing, then you would be eligible for the FOP’s Salary Reimbursement Option if I represent you at the disciplinary hearing.

Actually, just being able to discuss the pros and cons of appealing and the odds of success is very beneficial in making a plan for moving forward.

In the event you are unfamiliar with the FOP’s Salary Reimbursement Option, it has been utilized by many FOP members.

If you are suspended by the NOPD and you do not believe there is any chance of success on appeal, then the FOP will reimburse you for your lost salary in lieu of an appeal destined to fail. The FOP will reimburse you at a rate of $150/day for up to 5 days.

For example, if you are sustained for violating Rule 4, Performance of Duty, Paragraph 2, Instructions from an Authoritative Source, you could be suspended for between 2 and 10 days. The presumptive penalty for a first offense violation of Rule 4, Performance of Duty, Paragraph 2, Instructions from an Authoritative Source, a Level C violation, is a 5-day suspension. If you know that you actually violated the Rule in question and there is ample evidence that you violated the Rule in question and you would lose a Civil Service appeal, then it might be better to get a check for $750. Of course, there is no way to make blanket statements about which way would be better. That is where a healthy discussion between attorney and client is very beneficial.

To conclude, the NOPD will begin holding disciplinary hearings again on May 16. If you are issued a Disciplinary Hearing Notification, you should call me so that I can attend the hearing with you. Doing so will make you eligible for the FOP’s Salary Reimbursement Option. It does not matter if you called me for the early part of the investigation or not. Having the FOP Salary Reimbursement Option as a fail-safe is always good. I have also found that being able to answer questions about the hearing helps officers feel less anxious about the hearing.

Feel free to call.

Donovan