Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
OverSword

Cop fired, didn't write enough tickets

8 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

OverSword
Quote

A police officer in Alpharetta, Georgia, claims he was fired for not issuing enough traffic tickets to motorists in the area.

Officer Daniel Capps was on the force for nine years and was ultimately terminated because he declined to issue a traffic ticket to a driver after he bumped into another car. According to a department memo directed at officers, if there is an accident with any “damage that needs to be fixed with more than a little wax and elbow grease, you need to write the citation” — even if there are no injuries and the damage is minor.

As long as officers are called to the scene of a car accident, this rule is supposed to apply. But Capps decided to let the motorist who caused the minor incident off with a warning.

“Someone’s already needing to pay the insurance. It’s a hassle. There’s no need to have a ticket on top of that,” he told local outlet CBS 46, adding that he doesn’t believe it’s a police officer’s job to make people’s lives miserable.

Source is the Daily Sheeple so it must be a lie, right? :P

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Not A Rockstar

I was downgraded in a performance report and ragged to death to write more tickets, yet they refused to set a quota to avoid getting bad press for doing that (if they got quoted, and I would have made sure they did lol), and did move to another supervisor as a result. This is about revenue for some, and is quite real pressure in some units. A set policy about ticketing the at fault driver I can understand but just enough generic moving violations, when I caught more burglars and thieves than the other shifts could claim in my beat because I liked creeping and peeping and hunting them down if they were out? Not fair IMO and I do get this guy's point of view. I also felt it was not my job to just go out and levy additional taxes on folks for a unspoken quota, not that I thought "wow, he needs to be stopped and I need to get his attention not to drive like that!"

Totally believable, IMO.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

In the process of reading the OP's post, this has me remembering being back in a town in one place my hubby was stationed at, where it was well known (from my observation) that the town's police, (off base) were pressured to get tickets, because it was revenue for them. It got to the point to dreading driving through the town (or really concentrate on driving really really safe and slow. ) in the last week of the month. That's was because, if not many tickets were written up from the beginning to this point, they would be out watching and pulling you over. 

And yeah, I and us all, felt it was very unfair. If I remember correctly, I think a representative for the town, or the whole town itself, actually went in to the town's station to protest and something else, (that part I can't remember) 

So, before reading the rest on a link here, I felt, this was wrong. And probably unethical in my personal point of view. Even more so, in seeing it in the same way the officer in the article felt about it. 

Now, talking about going to the first link and reading it all. I do feel, that the officer is a fair person, and I can really understand, (and appreciate) his compassionate reasoning in this. Though, I also find out his firing was due to a particular incident. So, I wonder, on one hand, should someone get a ticket, because the accident was caused by some form of 'traffic violation'? On the other hand, sometimes rear ender bumper accidents, could also be caused freakishly, like slick and unseen roads, and not able to stop the car in time, because of the slick roads. (Yeah, that happened to me. :(  :blush:  ) and in that accident, the officer did say, nicely, technically, I am at fault. (If I remember correctly now, the rear ender will always be at fault) But, no ticket was written, (because the officer said it was a freak of nature thing) and the guy I rear ended didn't want my insurance information, because he saw no damage to his car, and saw I had more damage. Despite it all ending the way it did, yeah, I was still at fault. And I did learn to be more careful when it just rains, and think how the roads can become slick because of it. So, in the end, I wonder at how the officer could be crossing the line at making his decision despite what the rules say. 

Here's another thing I wonder at, reading more of the article. It looked like there had to be more of a reason to fire the officer, so his history had to be looked up?! And all the things that was listed, was being considered?! I wonder, if I'm getting that straight. To me, it's like they're reaching. I don't know. :no: 

By the way, the first link went to the tv station's link itself and not to the 'Sheeple' site like the second link. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dark_Grey

I adjust my driving habits according to the day of the month. Most days I drive 10 - 15 over the speed limit (flow of traffic on the highway,) but during the last week of the month I mind my manners and wave to the Officer with the radar gun.

Ticket quotas are that obvious around here. It's not about safety, it's about money.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles

Couple of thing which could be separate here.

If he was way under the amount of tickets as other officers, this could be warranted.  Just making up numbers here.   If officers average 30 tickets per week, but this guy averages 5, then this may be justified.  

 

I think it is a crappy policy to require officers to issue a ticket at all fender benders.    That is just going to increase arguments of who was at fault. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not A Rockstar
Posted (edited)

Couple things here I can offer my view as a retired cop on.

This cop had a few issues which made him unpopular with the guy over him. He wore earring(s) and really whatever your opinion, on duty you dress to code and rep the department, not you, same as the military. Off duty, knock yourself out. There is one bad point.

Two he slacked on tickets and did not pull up slack in anything else mentioned and was warned about it and also told the policy was write the wrecks. Nuther bad point.

Three, he was mad to get counselled the prior time and bad mouthed the LT and asked the other guys openly what they thought - fomenting some unrest there and dissing his superior officer. Nuther point. 

Four, after being warned he broke policy and did not write a ticket. Dude was asking to be let go, IMO.

All of which does not change the fact that a set quota bothers me unless it is comparatively low to show you are out patrolling the speeders. etc. Officers well over that should be mentioned as being aggressive in it so they get traffic slots later. You should not be penalized for plainly writing some routinely and regularly and if one MUST ticket at faults, then ok then. 

Far as arguments over who is at fault if a cop writes the report right there is no question. He can make it clear what his findings are ticket or not. Just your insurance company is the driver. I got MANY calls from ins co's wanting to know who got the ticket, using only that to decide how to pay out, not read and use their own heads. They demanded tickets, some of them. I tended to write when it was really a stupid wreck or anyone got harmed, for certain. Otherwise it depended. 

edit to add: it also depends on the dept. I was a deputy sheriff and had a LOT to do besides traffic. I was all there was for about a fourth the county at times and it was a lot of ground to cover. A City PD has less to do, there, smaller area, often a lot more manning and so necessarily works traffic a lot more. Alpharetta is a city pd I believe.

Edited by Not A Rockstar
a bit more info
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
qxcontinuum
Posted (edited)

A while ago after I completed the police academy I was invited to a conference in which the main subject was speeding. In Canada speed limit is snail peace at 100 km/he. This is how i"ve learn how much police have influence over law making. The conversation was focused on revenue and only 5 % on safety. Nobody cares about safety so much bs...

Edited by qxcontinuum
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AnchorSteam
On 4/19/2018 at 8:39 AM, Not A Rockstar said:

Totally believable, IMO.

Yes, it is, there is a lot of $$$ at stake, and the Police are beholden to the Politicians who take that money for themselves.

The whole arrangement is a bit... Roman, if you ask me.

 

((have the controls here gone totally spazo for anyone else here? WOW.... nowthing is working!!!!)))!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.