« JUST ANOTHER DAY | Main | Another teacher arrested for sex with student »

March 20, 2008

JUST A THOUGHT

To sue or not to sue, that is the question. Since the announcement of Mark Lunsford’s intent to sue the Citrus County Sheriff’s Office I have heard rumors from other victim’s families that they may enter a law suit against the agency that investigated their child’s fate. Some, if not all, may have a legitimate excuse to file a law suit but why now? This raises the question of did the law enforcement agency really err or did they follow federal, state and local laws in addition to Standard Operating Procedure of the department in order to protect everyone’s rights?
Speaking from the standpoint of a law enforcement officer I can honestly say that 99.9 percent of the officers investigating incidents involving children put their all into the investigation. Some have children and relate to their family. To save a child’s life is one of the greatest rewards an investigator can have so to believe that an officer or investigator acted improperly, deliberately, is really reaching for someone to put the blame on. Some agencies more proficient than others have better resources and training, although every agency in the State of Florida operates under the Criminal Justice System for Police Standards. That means that every officer hired has to complete a minimum standard of training. Sure, some pass with honors and others barely pass but they passed and met the requirements of the State of Florida.
Anyone not familiar with the training may picture the old wild west where someone, usually the fastest gun in town, is picked as sheriff by placing a badge on his chest and have him swear to uphold the law. Those days are long gone. The training of a law enforcement officer is tough. I have attended three law enforcement academies. In each academy, during the introduction, the cadets are urged not to sneak off in the dark of night because they can’t handle the pressure. The first week of training is usually the week that the class is reduced in size. Many believe that you go to school, get a patrol car, arrest people and that is being a police officer. Search and Seizure, Latent Investigations, Interview and Interrogation Techniques, How To testify In Court, Probable Cause, Traffic Collision Investigation and many more topics that must be passed with a written test before a cadet can move forward. All of the classes are taught by professionals ie; attorneys from the State Attorney’s Office, Public Defender, and certified instructors for each topic offered. Once a cadet has completed the academic phase they are put with a Field Training Officer (FTO) that evaluates them for a period of time and in some cases the cadet will placed with a second FTO for further evaluation. Reports on the cadet’s progress or lack thereof is documented daily and turned into supervisors once a week. Once a cadet has been released to work on his or her own they are still on a probationary status.
Once an officer has satisfactorily completed the probationary period they are allowed to apply for a specialty unit ie; Crimes Against Persons, Crimes Against Property, Traffic, Crime Prevention, Warrants Division etc. Each section have special units within that unit. Traffic Homicide, Swat, Hostage Negotiations, Cold Cases, Gangs, Hate Crimes, Burglary, Grand Theft, Auto Theft, Vandalism and the list goes on. The training and evaluations continue. Many sections will have several investigators assigned. At the beginning of each shift the investigators are given a copy of reports that have come in from the previous day. This is every day and the reports never stop coming. It is incumbent that the investigators read the reports and contact the victims as soon as they can. The cases are prioritized as to the seriousness or urgency and the less serious crimes are nearer the bottom of the list. A child reported missing is a priority. It will be assigned to a missing person’s detective who will gather all information and begin an investigation. Alerts are issued to surrounding agencies as well as Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Due to the modern age of computer technology the alert bulletin is in every car. This does not mean that every unit stops what they are doing. Unless the information pertains to their specific area they continue protecting the citizens of that area. Unfortunately crime does not stop at this time. The units patrol their areas responding to calls for police assistance, keeping in mind the missing child information. If necessary, off duty, auxiliary, reservists and volunteers are called in for search and rescue missions.
It is said that families felt too much time was wasted on investigating family members when the investigators should have been looking elsewhere. Ninety percent (90%) of all crimes committed against children are committed by family members. As an investigator, where would you start? The odds favor that a family member or very close friend is suspect. While the patrol officers are routinely looking and aware of the missing child, only one or two investigators follow leads. They gather information, eliminating bad from good. Once a lead has been investigated they move to the next. Imagine losing a ring in your yard and going down the street to a neighbors yard to start looking. Step by step methodically is the only way to achieve a thorough investigation, starting at the beginning.
Do investigators, officers, attorneys, doctors, carpenters, painters or any other professionals make mistakes? You bet they do! Do they do it on purpose? Likely not but to err is human.
Whatever happened to talking to someone about your concerns? Did you give them a chance to sit and explain or answer your questions? At what point did you become an expert on policy and procedure, search and seizure or any other investigative technique? Being the parent or guardian of missing or murdered child is a tough road to travel and everyone understands you need closure, but a law suit?
In closing and referring to the Lunsford case I am always torn with a professional such as a medical examiner stating she died right away and an attorney saying she was alive for days. When John Couey denied the charges, no one believed him. Now he implies she was alive for days and his word becomes gospel.
Whatever the outcome of the Lunsford case or the possible future law suits of other families, I pray that all of you achieve your goal and closure and hope that it is not a money issue. In most cases a legislative act is required to change laws and policy, not a law suit.
For those who are thinking I have not experienced the loss of a child, think again. My son died twenty years ago, by gun shot. I miss him more today then when he died. There are so many events that we could have shared and as I grow older the more important they seem. I could have sued Smith-Wesson for the manufacture of the pistol. I could have sued the ammo maker for making the bullet that penetrated his body. I was thinking of suing his wife as she could have intervened. Maybe the paramedics who were not able to keep him alive would be a law suit. Let’s sue the police department for not patrolling the neighborhood that morning and preventing this death. Maybe I should sue me as I was home that morning and lived across the street. Oh I could go on as to who is the blame but the bottom line is, he is gone. No amount of money or tears will bring him back.
As for the law enforcement side of the issue, I served twenty nine years in law enforcement. I attended three academies and became specialized in several areas or investigations. I was unable to save my son!

'Judge no man until you walk a mile in his moccasins'

Posted by admin at March 20, 2008 9:30 AM

Comments

Posted by: Sylvia Brown at March 22, 2008 10:32 AM

Post a comment