« beverly bacon gray rest in peace
well-rounded »

barney miller tampa bureau

jasonjason permalink | categories: law enforcement, tampa
by jason @ 8:05 pm

Update 21Jun06 9:39am:  LEOaffairs.com does have posts about the Gene Strickland investigations.

You may remember when the investigation began on Tampa’s uniformed frat club (aka anti-crime squad) and their leader, Sgt. Gene Strickland.  The Internal Affairs probe is now complete and punishments have been handed out.  Some of the punishments seem minor from a civilian’s point of view, but I assume that

“…demoted to detective and assigned to the legal division, working asset forfeiture”

is the police equivalent of counting cans at a can factory.

To see how the police feel, we’ll keep checking LEOaffairs.com.  I haven’t found any postings about the development yet, but I bet over the coming days we will see some information (and a lot of opinions) turn up there.

But we still don’t have all the information.  Last March, the St. Pete Times explained why we will have to wait for all the lurid details.  Contrary to recent TPD protocol, it is illegal for the police to release the results of their investigation until all discipline (and appeals, I assume) is complete.

So, without knowing those details, it is impossible to see why two junior officers were fired, while the constant with most issues - Gene Strickland - was only demoted and reassigned.  

It will be telling to see if the officers appeal the firings.  As a former union employee myself, I know if union members are fired for a good reason, they rarely appeal the decision.  The union makes it clear they are not interested in wasting everyone’s time.

Tags: ,

Possibly related posts (auto-generated)

3 Responses to “barney miller tampa bureau”

  1. Michael Hussey Says:
    June 20th, 2006 at 8:45 pm

    So, without knowing those details, it is impossible to see why two junior officers were fired, while the constant with most issues - Gene Strickland - was only demoted and reassigned.

    Strickland is a 25 year veteran. That’s the short answer. There is a key piece you missed in your post. Strickland was also found guilty in another internal investigation of rigging traffic lights to do illegal searches.

    In a May 2005 memo, Strickland told his supervisors that he had directed his squad to manipulate traffic signals at three Tampa Heights intersections with a traffic control device called a “pickle” that allows the user to dictate how long a light stays red.

    The operation took place on four or five occasions stretching back to 2004, he said.

    Officers kept the stoplights at each intersection red long enough for them to check the license plates of cars and see if they were stolen.

    He said he hoped the method of checking tags on stopped cars would allow officers to “box in” the cars and “to negate the probability of vehicular pursuits of stolen cars.”

    Department officials said the tactic netted no stolen cars. More important, his bosses weren’t pleased with his methods.

    “In the police business, you have to have a reason to stop somebody,” said Chief Steve Hogue. “When you keep somebody at a traffic light beyond the normal cycle of it, then you’re essentially detaining that person.”

    Strickland has also been issued a 4 day suspension for another incident. He is fighting that. The suspension, the sexual harrassment and illegal searches have all made the news in a few months time. The police culture protects long-serving vets. Strickland isn’t going anywhere.

  2. Jason Says:
    June 21st, 2006 at 8:59 am

    Actually the second link in the story is to my post about the traffic light issue. There was no internal investigation of it (well no formal investigation), Strickland notified his superiors of the tactic in a memo and they told his to stop it immediatly. A “mild rebuke” is how to Trib characterized it. Also without the details of the Internal Affairs report on the sexual harassment investigation being published believing his long service saved Strickland is an assumption. If the two younger officers were guilty of egregious violations and Strickland was not then the punishment makes sense. It is really more prudent to wait for the Internal Affairs report to be published before voicing opinions on the punishment.

  3. Michael Hussey Says:
    June 21st, 2006 at 8:14 pm

    The traffic light incident was a clear fourth amendment violation. The searching for a stolen car excuse doesn’t buy. TPD gets make and licence tags. Strickland was stopping traffic without probable causeDifferent news stories cite between three to five incidents that traffic lights were rigged. It’s clear law breaking.

    How many times does Strickland need to be investigated? All these incidents involve Strickland’s task force. He was aware of the sexual harrassment and did nothing. Even Stephen Hogue salled the traffic stops “a gray part of the law that I didn’t feel comfortable with.” The traffic stops were done as searches.

    There was also the taser incident that TPD said Strickland should have stopped.

    We have a task force leader who let his squad make sex comments radio chatter, violate the fourth amendment, let officers photograph a penis, watch porn during roll call, and sexual harrass a female officer. If Strickland was working at McDonald’s he would be fired by now.

Leave a Reply