Skip to comments.Watch out, Denver! Cop reinstated after 143 mph drunken joyride
Posted on 05/24/2012 4:00:13 AM PDT by servo1969
A troubled Denver police officer has been reinstated after a three-member panel of the citys Civil Service Commission overturned his termination for driving 143 miles per hour while drunk.
Derrick Saunders was arrested on June 17, 2010 for cruising 88 miles per hour over the posted speed limit. He had a .089 blood alcohol level at the time of his arrest.
This wasnt the officers first run-in with the law. Since he was hired by the police force in 2007, other felonious allegations against Saunders include brandishing a gun to scare McDonalds employees into working faster.
ABC 7 reports that in 2009, Saunders, then assigned to securing Denver International Airport, grew impatient while waiting for his order at the fast food restaurant. He allegedly pulled a gun on employees when they failed to prepare his food with the utmost haste.
A jury acquitted Saunders of the gun-brandishing allegations in April 2010 one month before his undisputed high-speed joyride.
In canning Saunders, who pled guilty to drunk and reckless driving charges, city safety manager Alex Martinez wrote, The fact that you drove at this dangerous speed while your ability to drive was impaired by alcohol is shocking.
The three-member panel of the Civil Service Commission that reviewed Saunders case, however, decided that Martinez had failed to prove any extraordinary aggravation and also failed to consider mitigating factors.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
[T]he disciplinary action of termination far exceeds the discipline given to other officers in comparative or greater misconduct cases, the commissioners said.
Martinez is outraged by the decision, saying in a statement published by the Denver Post that, this decision completely misinterprets the disciplinary code, undermines civilian authority to manage the police and uses the concept of consistent discipline to confine the department to the distant past.
Martinez, who is appealing the reinstatement, added that, We would never hire someone as a law enforcement officer who had engaged in this behavior.
Let me see, the reason he was reinstated is because ______
(Queue the “That’s racist!” little boy graphic.)
Maybe the folks sitting on the Civil Service Commission at the same pigment color of this person Derrick? Ought to make you feel real protected having someone of his level of integrity watching your streets at night.
143mph? What the hell was he driving?
You need a pretty good sports car to hit almost 150 MPH.
I knew it.
Might have been a crotch rocket.
Those sport bikes can reach that speed easily.
I don’t know what they used to catch him.
"Since that acquittal, the Colorado State Patrol arrested Saunders for DUI, speeding at more than 40 miles per hour over the posted speed limit and reckless driving. According to court records, the arrest was made by the State Patrol on Gun Club Road in Arapahoe County late on the night of June 17. Documents say Saunders was at the wheel of a 2008 Infiniti that was clocked at 143 miles per hour in a 55 mph zone. Saunders submitted to a DUI test which the Colorado State Patrol says showed the officer was legally drunk."
Not only is Denver incapable of controlling their uniformed gangsters' behavior, it looks like they overpay them.
That, or a “rice-rocket” motorcycle. In any case, it’s not easy to ‘maintain control’ on the crappy public roadways for a very long distance, and stopping it safely is also a ‘minor problem’.
That’s what I originally thought:
In any case, stopping safely/short from 143mph is no small feat, either, whatever you’re riding/driving. A rabbit/deer in the roadway is almost always fatal...
I sure wouldn’t give pursuit, if I was a LEO. Let the radio and chopper do the dangerous work. Pity anyone who got in his way.
“...a 2008 Infiniti that was clocked at 143 miles per hour...”
Who knew they go that fast? “The need for speed”?
I once hit 240 kph (around 145 mph) in a 5-series BMW back in 2000.
Of course, I was working in Stuttgart Germany and did that on the Autobahn.
Those roads are built for it. They’re pretty safe drivers at the higher-than-here speeds, too. But when there’s an *accident* over there, it’s usually a big one with a lot of carnage, IIRC.
My 2007 Crown Vic Police interceptor does 140, no problem.
He wasn’t just driving way over the speed limit, he was legally impaired. No sympathy.
I also google-mapped gun club road there in Arapahoe Cty. It is in Aurora just SE of Buckley AFB. It looks to be fairly straight and barren on either side, but only about 3 - 4 miles long.
So the facts of the story make sense, even if they reflect monumental bad judgement. That's the crux of the issue for me. This guy should've been fired on the spot. Literally, I'd have called his supervisor that night at his arrest and the paperwork would've been done by the next morning.
Most reasonable people (sorry lib-lurkers) understand that while at work your employer expects you to conduct yourself in a reasonably professional manner - dress/uniform, dealing with coworkers and custoemrs/clients, etc. Unless you're self-employed, you've got to play by their rules because hey, it's their business, their reputation, etc. Off duty, free time is yours to do with as you please.
There are a whole lot of jobs/careers/fields however where even your "off" time and the way you conduct yourself there impact your professional life. Generally these tend to be jobs where you may be called upon to make or entrusted with decisions that have serious consequences for large numbers of people. For example: police officers, firemen, doctors, politicians/leaders, military commanders, people with security clearances, pilots, ships captains, corporate leaders... etc.
All of these people are entrusted to make serious decisions, protect information/confidentiality, etc. Therefore the judgement (or lack thereof) they show "off duty" is just as important as what they do "on duty." You don't want someone with a history or pattern of making bad calls deciding on your medical treatment, patrolling your streets armed, sending your son/daughter into battle, keeping your secrets safe from the Chinese, etc.
I know "liberals" have a hard time with this concept - "what I do in my private life should be private." Yes, I agree, unless you want to take on the responsibility of one of these kinds of positions. Then the "whole you" comes into play and consideration. And that, wrapping back around to this case, is why I feel this guy self-selected out of the peace officer profession. There is no way I want someone with a history of these kinds of lapses in judgement pulling me over at night. Maybe he gets nervous, makes yet another bad call and decides to shoot me 'cause he feels threatened. Sure, maybe witnesses and/or in-car video nails him and he does time but, ah, I'm still dead. In some professions, you don't wait for the indicators from someone's personal life to finally bleed over into their professional life, the consequences are too grave. He should be out on his ***.
He waved a gun at McDonalds employees? I’ll bet they put a booger in his Big Mac.
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.