Officer: Traffic stop lacked 'professional courtesy'

Wildcard

Moderator
Officer: Traffic stop lacked 'professional courtesy'
An off-duty police officer complains he didn't get 'professional courtesy' in West Des Moines.

By JENNIFER JACOBS
REGISTER STAFF WRITER

February 15, 2006


Once Sgt. Ken Brown flashed his police identification card, he expected the West Des Moines officer who pulled him over for driving with dim lights to just wave him along.

It was a cold December night. Brown, who was traveling with his wife and two young children, was anxious to get home before their van, which was having electrical problems, stalled.

Instead, to Brown's displeasure, the officer demanded his driver's license, then spent several minutes running background checks that Brown thought were unnecessary for someone who had identified himself as a Des Moines police sergeant. He was not ticketed, but later, a block from his home, Brown's vehicle died.

The next day, Brown, who has been a police officer for 13 years, filed a written complaint about the West Des Moines officer's conduct. Brown said he wasn't given the "professional courtesy" officers extend to one another.

"As long as I've been an officer, any time I've stopped another law enforcement officer, once they've identified themselves or I found out they're law enforcement, then I treat them accordingly," Brown said. "It's called professional courtesy. And I felt like I didn't get that, considering my vehicle was having problems. It's not like I was doing 100 miles per hour through West Des Moines."

Special treatment?
Brown's reaction to the incident raised questions about special treatment for off-duty law enforcement officers. Police ethics instructors said officers shouldn't expect any courtesies.

"I know this quote-unquote professional courtesy occurs out there," said Rod Van Wyk of the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy. "I'm not going to deny it happens. It gives law enforcement a black eye."

Van Wyk said it confirms what people already suspect: Police officers are free to violate traffic laws because they're immune to tickets.

West Des Moines Police Chief Jack O'Donnell dismissed Brown's complaint, saying his officer, Bryan Grube, treated Brown the same way he would treat anyone else.

"As a veteran police officer and supervisor, you understand the importance of officers being fair and consistent in their treatment of individuals with whom they have contact," O'Donnell wrote in a letter to Brown, which he copied to Des Moines Police Chief Bill McCarthy.

Brown, who agreed to be interviewed after The Des Moines Register obtained documents from his complaint file through an open records request, pointed out that he wasn't speeding, and the car troubles were outside his control.

But there is a certain understanding among officers, especially during minor traffic stops, he said.

"I'm not saying you can drive like you're a stunt man and just be reckless," he said. "I'm not saying you get a pass for that. But normally, a minor infraction, if you're going 5 or 10 miles over the limit and you get stopped and you identify yourself, usually there's a professional courtesy amongst officers. You know, 'Hey, just slow down.' And you get a warning."

Arlan Ciechanowski, the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy's assistant director, said: "When you begin to talk in that manner, where does the line stop? Will you give an officer a break at 10 over? What about 20 over? What if they are drunk?"

More serious ethics violations — such as income tax evasion, embezzlement or conviction of a felony — can lead to an officer's decertification, Ciechanowski said.

Larry Edwards, a 32-year Des Moines police officer who is now retired, said there is no sense of obligation for an officer to take care of another police officer.

On traffic stops, officers have the option of giving anyone a warning, said Dave Murillo, a 28-year officer and president of the Des Moines Police Burial and Protective Association.

"If they're polite to me and remorseful about what they've done, I'll give anyone a break, whether they're a citizen or another officer," Murillo said. "But depending on the magnitude of offense, if cutting them some slack would put the officer's butt in a sling, they're not going to do that."

If, for instance, an off-duty officer runs a red light and injures another driver, a ticket is almost automatic, Murillo said. The same is true for more serious crimes, he said.

"Can you imagine the ramifications to police administration if we didn't arrest a thief who was wearing a badge?" he said. "It'd be catastrophic."

Van Wyk said even small ethics violations are wrong — and that includes accepting gratuities such as a cup of coffee from a convenience store. He said he knows officers argue that a free drink won't prompt them to give that business any favors, but it's still over the line.

"When it comes to police officers, I think the public expects a higher standard. If we're going to call you Iowa's finest, what does that mean?" Van Wyk said.

'Higher standard'
Academy Director Penny Westfall, who teaches the police ethics classes, drills the "higher standard" concept into recruits' heads. "I say, 'If you can't uphold that, now is the time to not choose this as a profession, because society expects that of us,' " she said. "Another officer should never, never put another officer in a difficult situation."

Brown, who is assigned to the detectives bureau in Des Moines, said he never asked for any favors during the Dec. 4 incident, and he doesn't fault Grube for pulling him over.

"You see a vehicle with no lights, of course, you're going to stop them," he said. "But he treated me like I was some burglar on the prowl, or just some suspect up to no good, which I was not happy with, especially with my wife and kids in the van."

Brown said he is also upset that Grube didn't give his family adequate assistance when the van broke down a few blocks away.

Chief O'Donnell said he called Brown to resolve the complaint informally, but Brown was adamant that Grube owed him an apology.

After an internal affairs officer interviewed Brown, his wife and Grube, O'Donnell concluded that Grube, who has seven years' experience, followed all department policies. The chief said Grube thought he had escorted Brown to a place where he could make it home safely without being struck by another car due to the dim lights. He didn't know Brown's car broke down after it turned onto a side street.

McCarthy, Des Moines' police chief, said Tuesday he intends to talk to Brown but hadn't had a chance to yet. He has faith in his officer. "Kenny's an honorable person," he said.

Department policy is to be fair with everyone, McCarthy said.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060215/NEWS01/602150378/1001/archive



"You see a vehicle with no lights, of course, you're going to stop them," he said. "But he treated me like I was some burglar on the prowl, or just some suspect up to no good, which I was not happy with, especially with my wife and kids in the van."

Welcome to the world of us serfs, officer Brown.
 
Professional police officers should attempt to follow the highest standards instead of thinking they should be given special permission to disobey the law.

I realize that Professional Courtesy is a way of life, but it should not be expected.

Jerry
 
I see no problems here, cop did his job, the off duty SGTs ego got a bit bruised so he filed a complaint. Complaint had no merit and was dismissed. This happens oh, 5000 times a day. Not really big news.
 
I see no problems here

I do. The cop (officer Brown) expected special treatment because of his position. He was angry for being treated like any other citizen would have been treated during a traffic stop. The fact that he expected/demanded special treatment because he is an LEO speaks volumes. It is a symptom of a larger problem. I am sure many more think like Officer Brown.;)
 
I am sure many more think like Officer Brown.

Don't be too sure of that.

Professional police officers should attempt to follow the highest standards instead of thinking they should be given special permission to disobey the law.

Amen to that, brother! Amen to that!

I see no problems here, cop did his job, the off duty SGTs ego got a bit bruised so he filed a complaint. Complaint had no merit and was dismissed.

Exactly so.

The moral of the story: Don't break the law, you won't get to meet Mr. Policeman. And if you ARE Mr. Policeman, you have no business breaking the law. Period.
 
I think the way of courtesy is proper and fair. I expected it of officers and extended it myself. Think of our troops, their dependents, parents and significant others, they should be treated to a higher standard as far as possible. If a parent or child is trying to get home as fast as possible for a hardship/death/hospice care patient visit, give them every courtesy. Sometimes I am truly sickened by the lack of moral fiber, lack of courtesy, lack of common sense and seemingly lack of common decency displayed by some and reported willy nilly by a biased media. People who need aid and assistance expect it to be provided by decent human beings. A LEO who would NOT aid and assist a fellow LEO and his family is beneath contempt. It was, is and always will be wrong.
 
I wonder if the average citizen that's supposed to be "protected and served" would have been given the same treatment , or would they have not only been delayed , but ticketed as well.

I find 2 things wrong here ...

1. The special treatment the officer thinks he should get
2. That the person driving the vehicle was having a problem and instead of being SERVED or helped , was harassed.

:cool:
 
I had no idea that professional courtesy meant letting fellow officers break the law and not follow standard traffic stop procedures (checking DL) and that if that did not happen that you file a complaint with the officer's department for not letting you get away with breaking the law.

Brown should be happy the officer took an interest in him. The officer did not know Brown, his family, and Brown didn't know him. For all the officer knew, the woman and kids were hostages of some sort, Brown was actually bound and gagged in the trunk, and the driver was a bad guy that had a fair resemblance to Brown. Had the officer just waved them on to go about their business, then no doubt Brown and his family would have suffered.

While Brown said he didn't ask for any favors or special treatment, he apparently expected favors and special treatment. So because the officer did his job, Brown felt he was being treated like a criminal? Since when does following standard procedures make a person feel like they are being treated like a criminal when as law enforcement themself, they know the procedure is standard routine.

I am even a bit amused by the fact that Brown thought Officer Grube did wrong by not stopping an providing assistance to Brown and his family when their van did break down after the stop. Apparently being a block from home is a distance much to far for an off duty officer to walk with his wife and kids. Yes, it was cold, but that is Iowa. Everyone in the car should have had proper clothing.

I wonder what Brown thought should have been proper assistance. Was the officer to call them a cab or wrecker or was the officer to become their personal taxi?

I can understand Brown's point. At a block away from his own home and with the self righteous attitude he projects and his sense of entitlement for being a cop, I am betting that most of his neighbors would not feel too inclined to come get him and take him and his wife home.

One block from home and he wants assistance. Holy crap. It isn't like being a block from home meant haviing to pass through Checkpoint Charlie in Berlin.

Kudos for Officer Grube doing his job properly. I am guessing that he probably doesn't care about my kudos as the job he performed was no different than on any other traffic stop and unlike Brown, would not think such basic activities require any special attention to him for doing his job.
 
Brown was a dumbass to file the complaint.

Whether it's true or not, that complaint says to the public "we cops expect, practically as a matter of policy, to not be ticketed like the rest of you peons".

Now, THAT is a black eye.
 
A LEO who would NOT aid and assist a fellow LEO and his family is beneath contempt. It was, is and always will be wrong.

Sir William, you once said that you would never question an LEO's actions. You were quite adamant about it. Now, you are criticizing an LEO and saying that an officer who didn't give another officer special, preferential treatment is beneath contempt. Can you explain the contradiction? I'm not trying to be obnoxious, but you made an absolute statement one time that you have now gone back on when it's no longer LEO vs. civilian, but LEO vs. LEO.
 
"who was traveling with his wife and two young children, was anxious to get home before their van, which was having electrical problems, stalled."

Good thing his family didn't burn up in an electrical fire, then he'd gotten a ticket for defective equipment.

Sorry, I couldn't finish reading the article after getting to the above quote. Well, I did catch the part where it stalled a block from home. Suppose it had stalled in a turn and he'd lost the power steering? It's one thing to risk your own life.

John
 
Sgt. Brown may be right, but his complaint shouldn't have been based on a lack of "professional courtesy". It should have been based on a lack of courtesy in general.

I know of no department that cites for a vehicle defect unless a) the defect was responsible for an accident, or b) a prior warning for the defect was issued. Even the Ohio Highway Patrol, that has a reputation for being hard- nosed, doesn't cite for a defect. What they do is issue a special, defect warning, which gives the owner 72 hours to repair the defect and provide proof of same. This applies to everyone, whether or not you're a cop.

So the warning is issued. Now what? Unless my spidey senses are tingling, the driver is on his way. I have to have reason to detain and run check after check. There isn't a person here that wouldn't be PO'd if I stopped you for a minor violation, and detained you for 15-20 minutes while I poke into this & that, without apparent cause.

But so far, there's no lack of courtesy, right? Well, let's see: We have a family with kids that are having trouble. What should cops do for anyone having car trouble? You help them out. Out of gas? We drive you to a gas station & back to your car with 5 gallons of gas. Broke down? We make sure you get home. Broke an alternator belt & running on battery only (read: dim lights)? We either have 'em park it & drive them home, or escort them home. What we don't do is throw a warning or citation in their face & drive off to let 'em get home however they can, in an unsafe vehicle. This especially holds true when there's kids in the car, whether or not the person involved is an LEO.

The professional courtesy issue will go on forever, but there's no question that plain ol' country courtesy was lacking in this case.
 
+1 Capt. Charlie:

I agree with you about lack of courtesy by the guy, but it seems possibly even more than just that.

Maybe not just a lack of courtesy, but moreover, if the report is true, an existance of a rude, mean spiritedness that in my book should probably rule this guy out as being an LEO.

Or am I being too negative to say that he should not be a cop? I really don't feel like I would (as a citizen) want to be subjected to his actions.

I've met a lot of good cops, and very few jerks (as a citizen) but in my opinion, a person with a general mean spirited, piXX poor attitude, ought to working at the County tax assessor's office instead of walking around carrying a pistol, and granted the legal authority to make people stand there and put up with that type of abusive attitude.
 
Where do you live Captain? Utopia? Around here (Orange County) you DO get citations for vehicle defects. Such as burned out tail/head lights, the little lights that light up your license plate, worn tires (if they notice), and the list goes on.

The way I see it the off duty officer should not have been driving his car when noticed it was having problems. As soon as it started to die or noticed that there was a problem he should have pulled into a shop or called a tow-truck to tow him home. He also could have parked in a safe place and called a cab but he didn’t. He thought that just because he is a L.E.O. he can break the law when ever he wants.
He made poor decisions and now he wants special treatment?

And what’s with this “professional courtesy” stuff? Are you telling me that because you were a badge that you do not have to follow the same laws that you cite me for when I break them?
 
The professional courtesy issue will go on forever, but there's no question that plain ol' country courtesy was lacking in this case.

According to the article, the responding officer thought the situation as adequately resolved.

After an internal affairs officer interviewed Brown, his wife and Grube, O'Donnell concluded that Grube, who has seven years' experience, followed all department policies. The chief said Grube thought he had escorted Brown to a place where he could make it home safely without being struck by another car due to the dim lights. He didn't know Brown's car broke down after it turned onto a side street.

Why aren't we giving him the benefit of the doubt taht he did, in fact, extend the assistance he thought would handle the issue, and then return to his duties?
 
Captain-
I think you might be reaching here.
First off, the driver was not ticketed.

Now let's go to what we know:
- The driver identified himself as a cop
- Disenchanted with the Officer's procedure, the driver filed a complaint for "lack of professional courtesy"; not for failure to assist.

So, let's combine what we know. We know the driver's a moron from his complaint and statements of Birthright. We know nothing of the officer. Might it not be reasonable to assume that the driver was as much a moron during the stop as after? Might it not also be reasonable to assume that he gave the cop a rather difficult time, thus raising the officer's suspicions enough to run his license?

Judging from his "complaint" I tend to doubt he was begging for assistance from this cop....and can picture a situation where the officer wanted nothing more than to check him and send him on his way.

We're all ASSuming, here, including me. But I lean to what is in the record. From the record, we know what one of these guys is. We know nothing about the other. The Officer on duty gets the benefit of the doubt on this one. YMMV
Rich
 
Rich brings up an interesting point. The typical "cop bashing" thread has a civilian making an accusation; an investigation ensuing; and posters arguing either "the facts are clear, bad cop" or "wait for the evidence and give him the benefit of the doubt."

Now, we have some of the same people who would normally argue to give the responding officer the benefit of the doubt, instead arguing the cop made a mistake when the evidence is largely in the cop's favor, and any doubt is on the side of the complainant. The only apparent difference is that the complainant in this case is an officer himself, and one with a willingness to make a formal complaint about not getting special favor due to his status.
 
We know the driver's a moron from his complaint and statements of Birthright. We know nothing of the officer. Might it not be reasonable to assume that the driver was as much a moron during the stop as after? Might it not also be reasonable to assume that he gave the cop a rather difficult time, thus raising the officer's suspicions enough to run his license?
Now THAT, is a distinct possibility! I wouldn't dream of filing a formal complaint for a lack of "professional courtesy". I'd be embarrassed to tears to do so.

I think, though, that the attention to this incident is meant to highlight the real issue, which is the overall existence of "professional courtesy". It's an issue that's been tossed about here many times before, with the only result being that people remain strongly divided.

I've extended professional courtesy before, for minor violations. I've also extended the same courtesy, by another name, to numerous others, including barbers, waitresses, car salesmen, etc., and even (yikes!) lawyers :D .

On the flip side of the coin, I've arrested other officers, including one of my own, who is also a friend. It wasn't fun, and it wasn't easy, but it's what duty demanded.

The thing that bothers me is that some non-LEO's demand that any officer guilty of an infraction should not be given a break, no matter what, when those same people expect a break themselves. I don't favor LEO's simply because of their status, but I do think that any breaks given, should be given evenly, across the board, to both LEO's and non.
 
Back
Top