Skip to comments.Oklahoma cop sues over firing after he cited 3-year-old for peeing in public
Posted on 02/13/2014 11:51:24 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
Kenneth Qualls claims he had permission from on high to give the toddler a $2,500 public urination ticket in November 2012 after the boy began to pee in front of his house.
An Oklahoma cop canned for citing a 3-year-old boy for peeing outside is now suing the city of Piedmont for unfairly flushing his career.
Kenneth Qualls claims he had permission from on high to give little Dillan Warden a $2,500 public urination ticket in November 2012 after the tot unzipped in his pants on Ryan Drive.
The prohibited pee was on private property, the boys mother, Ashley Warden, said at the time.
"I said really, he is 3-years-old, and [the officer] said it doesn't matter its public urination, the boys grandmother, Jennifer Warden, told KWTV News 9 at the time.
But about 10 days after the ill-advised ticket, Qualls was dumped from the department, The Oklahoman reported.
During the 2012 pissing match, the officer was even called stupid by the citys mayor, furthering muddying his reputation, the suit claims.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
But it is OK in NY for gays to expose themselves in a parade.
Good. Being an idiot really ought to DQ someone from being a police officer.
Just goes to show that there are idiots in every state and city, even the “red” ones. The city did the right thing here. Someone like this genius doesn’t need to be running around with a gun and a pocket full of blank citations/tickets.
“Kenneth Qualls claims he had permission from on high to give little Dillan Warden a $2,500 public urination ticket in November 2012...”
Okay. So, even if he did have permission from above.........WHO DOES THIS TO A 3 YEAR OLD? That’s what 3 year olds do. Did he expect the 3 year old to pay a $2500 ticket? Check his I.D. to see if he was wanted?
Yes, it’s ridiculous.
But if he was in contact with his station and his superiors told him to give the ticket, he has a point in terms of his being fired.
Did he shot the boy’s dog for the same offense?f
In most states a 3yoa can’t even be charged with any crime let alone some thing as minor as this.
Thank God he didnt take a dump.
That’s why I live in the country with no close neighbors.
I can pee and shoot out the back, front and side doors and no one says a thing.
Qualls’ appearence before the Piedmont Personnel Board on in July, 2013.
Photo and his side of the story
A good friend of mine did this about age 2 in our yard. My mom always held it against him, but he grew up to be a really good guy. Yep, kids that age sometimes do this.
Too bad this case didn’t run its course. After a failure to pay the fine comes the likely warrant of arrest, which, given the cop’s apparent mindset, I imagine he would have been happy to serve. Another case for calling out SWAT, at that.
From what I heard about this case, the officer in question was parked a couple of blocks away, “casing” the area.
I’d say he probably had it in for the people or just the people in the neighborhood in general.
My 3 yr old, the other night, got confused about where he was supposed to change out of his swimsuit and began doing so poolside at the Y...
Supposedly the ticket was issued to the Mother.
Qualls was fired in November 2012 from the Piedmont Police Department after he ssued
Piedmont resident Ashley Warden a ticket because her three-year-old was allegedly
urinating in her front yard.
Oh... had that happen with a 2 yr old, in the front yard, in suburbia, on Christmas morning...
Yep, he should be fired as he has proven that he’s too stupid to occupy any position of authority.
But I must take issue with this statement: The prohibited pee was on private property, the boys mother, Ashley Warden, said at the time.
Public urination is a crime (though it shouldn't be by a 3 year old), it doesn't matter if a crime happens on public or private property. Following mom's logic, an adult male perv could expose himself to her son but as long as he was standing in his own front yard he could then claim this private property “exemption”.
Now both of my sons would have found themselves locked up for following mom and dad's advice, “better out in the yard then wetting you pants”, so there is a lot of common sense missing from the cops actions, but private property doesn't enter into this one.
It seems that no dogs were harmed in the making of this farce