Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Apr 14, 2013
I'm glad PAPD handled this and took the complaint and counseled the officer. I can't say that would be the case in other cities.
It's a minor deal but if someone was put off by it then it deserves the attention it got.
One can only wonder if there is a "Code of Conduct" in place in the Palo Alto Police Department that identifies the expected behavior of a police officer?
This incident is barely a blip on the radar--since we've seen Palo Alto Police officers charged with sexually assaulting women that they have detained--to local Palo Alto Police Dispatchers involved with inappropriate access to arrest records for personal use.
The bar for ethical behavior of police officers/staff needs to be necessarily high. There is no reason that this code should not be written down, and officers/staff expected to review it every year.
Sadly, our City Council has never shown much interest in the ethical behavior of the Palo Alto Police Department.
> According to the report, the woman was offended ("It had not been her intention to cultivate a personal relationship with the officer") and filed a complaint against the officer, who was then counseled by department management about the inappropriate nature of his text.
Part of me want to just say forget about this just a guy looking to "hook up", but then the other part says it's really cheap and scary and when done by someone with authority - is totally inappropriate, even if that person is not in the other person's life. There are a lot of unknown innuendos in an action like this. I think the officer should be fired on giving this more thought. This action really lays out how this officer views being a professional and that he does not take his job or Palo Alto seriously, what he takes seriously is "hooking up".
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
What an overreaction! PAPD has improved, obviously - the woman wasn't assaulted, just asked out - that's a definite improvement.
Once again, PA online blog readers know more than everyone else....
"Gennaco determined that the department handled the issue "quickly and appropriately.""
> PA online blog readers know more than everyone else
No one is claiming that, but it seems like you are when instead of just posting your own opinion must take swipes at other people ... just stick to what you can say about you why don't you?
>"Gennaco determined that the department handled the issue "quickly and appropriately."
That's why lapses in ethics and behavior keep happening ... and those are just the ones we hear about.
Back in the 70's corporations have very strict ethics code. If you worked at a certain level for IBM for example it was a bid deal to get a auto ticket. Drunk driving was cause for dismissal.
It seems sometimes that the people with the loudest voice of tolerance do not really understand these issues in the big picture over time.
In the past if an officer got a break like this they would think it was a major luck and good fortune and would never think to do anything questionable in the future ... now, even with many more people vying for any particular job even for less money, people often seem to see it as license to continue whatever dysfunction got them noticed to begin with.
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
I wonder how many of you who are so critical of the officer's actions were President Clinton fans. Did you also demand that he be fired? Are the only public officials that should be held so critically accountable are the ones that at the bottom of the public official food chain? Is this really a news worthy item? In any other profession you would never see this in print. So much is happening in the world that deserves public attention. Pathetic are the citizens who find this type of reporting worthy of attention.
I was not exactly a President Clinton "fan" but I did not think he should have left office for the Monica Lewinsky thing, that was purely political on the other side.
There is not Republican character assassination committee trying to go after this officer.
Plus, the officer is not an elected official, that is, he was not put in his job by the public.
What I am getting so tired of is the snide pointed comments without logic behind them.
I also do not get the editors removal of perfectly civil comments, and then locking this up again to prevent discussion instead of promoting it. Democracy is sometimes messy, if it gets too messy or a problem I can see taking action, but time after time the editors here jump in presumably because they want to influence the direction of the debate and often the reasoning given seems after the fact rationalizations. Just for the record, I resent it.
Create a town square forum or do not create a town square forum ... but if you do not, then do not call it a town square forum.
Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Happy Valentines – Let’s Be Friends
By Laura Stec | 2 comments | 19,318 views
Our Valentine’s Day baby
By Sally Torbey | 5 comments | 3,236 views
Engagement Rings: Myths and Options
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,228 views
Talking about baby
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 824 views
Home & Real Estate
Shop Palo Alto
Send News Tips
Express / Weekend Express
Circulation & Delivery
Mountain View Voice
© 2017 Palo Alto Online
All rights reserved.