Posted on 06/03/2006 6:33:05 AM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
A Houston police officer who criticized the Police Department's pursuit policies in car chases was fired Friday.
Chad Hoffman, Houston Police Officers' Union attorney, said officer Thomas Nixon received an 18-page letter of suspension outlining the reasons for his firing, which centered on his criticism of the department's pursuit policy.
"We knew that it was coming," Hoffman said. "We knew that the department intended to terminate him for those comments."
Houston Police Lt. Robert Manzo, department spokesman, confirmed the firing, but had no further details.
Nixon, an 11-year veteran of the force, publicly criticized the department's car chase policy after a Jan. 18 chase that ended in a head-on collision. Nixon said the department's policy wasn't tough enough. He said officers should have rammed the suspect's car before it became a threat to motorists.
"I don't think officers should be ramming vehicles ad hoc, what I feel is that officers need latitude to bring a chase to a stop," Nixon said Friday.
Nixon was reassigned to desk duty after making inflammatory comments about HPD chase procedure on a radio program. He said he would disobey lawful orders from superiors if he thought they were arbitrary.
He later filed a lawsuit claiming HPD violated his constitutional right to free speech and retaliated against him.
Hoffman said he will file an appeal with the civil service commission and amend the federal lawsuit to include damages resulting from the firing.
Nixon said he will seek reinstatement.
Remember this guy going off on the tube right after that chase?
... stand up for what's right, lose your seat...
And shameful.
Interesting. The U.S. Supreme Court just put out a ruling on this exact issue. It's not likely to help the officer in this case. Related FR thread.
"In a 5-to-4 decision, the court held that public employees' free-speech rights are protected when they speak out as citizens on matters of public concern, but not when they speak out in the course of their official duties."
An officer does not have the same free speech right when discussing department policy as a person not employed by the department would. If he is going to fall back on his First Amendment rights, he's got nuthin.
Hope is local union is strong. It's the only chance he will have to get his job back.
Is it just me,or is anyone else thinking what would happen if I went on TV and criticized my boss. I know I have every right to do that, but I would pretty well expect what would happen.Certain actions have expected consequences!
And I hope they're not;
you can't have the Indians telling the chiefs what to do and maintain any effective discipline, especially in what is a semi-military branch of local government.
There's a difference between "free speech" and "speech without consequences."
This guy wants the latter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.