100 Hours of Training can make you a cop in Maine
- Login to post comments
John has always been open about his background and biases on this subject. A quick search here would have revealed what he does.
As I stated in my first post, I did not start this thread to question the officer's actions here.
I do think most people are surprised to learn that one can be a police officer in Maine with so little training.
On top of that, those with the least training also are limited in the number of hours that they work so they also get little experience. Experience is as important as the training.
It is tougher to become a licensed plumber in this state than it is to become a cop. And a plumber has to work under another plumber for a certain period of time before sitting for the exam to be a master plumber.
Dan:
Curtis has a lot of experience on the road, and has done the FTO program in Waldoboro (with the "master plumber") as well as working a summer in Kennebunk. He's been trained in corrections. A partial list of his training does NOT take into account the considerable experience he also brings to the table. The press has a big FOIA request that will make public a lot of the information out there, though not all.
In my very biased view, I'd rather have a reserve officer backing me up who has NEVER been to the academy, but has three years on the road, and has successfully been through one FTO program, than one fresh out of the MCJA and "certified" for full time work, with no experience. To be fair, most inexperienced MCJA grads (though they are few in number -- a pile of them have worked summer reserve somewhere) would likely agree. After the academy, they have a pretty good idea as to the scope of what they don't yet know.
Curtis is only 24. How much experience can he really have? I get your point, but I think you are stretching it in this case.
Should we allow people to go to law school for one semester and work part-time as lawyers?
Dan:
That's what's ironic. He has many hours with the town. He needed a waiver from the Academy. This isn't (as you clearly realize) like trucking, where hours are a negative. Indeed, the real reason on the hour limit it as an incentive to the municipalities, not a recognition that increased experience is a disqualifying factor.
"...reflexive antipathy toward cops" at all, but I can understand how you might draw that conclusion based on my posts here. In fact I have a good relationship with many on the local police forces. I do have a problem with those who abuse and misuse the power and authority granted to them by the state over me, Lt. David Gordon of the Kennebunk Police Department in particular
Five arrests, and no conviction says a lot. A jury took less than an hour to determine I was not guilty of the original stalking charge and the DA declined to prosecute the other four. They were eqully ludlcrous. Still, cost me much financially, emotionally, and psychologically.
Local cops who view one part of the local citizenry differently and treat them differently should not be cops! We are, after all, a nation of laws, not of men. Then too is the 1st amendment.
charlie[/i]
Country:
It also casts considerable light on people (you in particular) who suggest (as you did here) that I know nothing of the event.
Mr. Chapman,
It might have helped if you had revealed the nature of your relationship to this case in the beginning. I have not been reading AMG since 2000, and I've rarely paid attention to your posts since I joined this forum, so I was unaware of your "profession." Had you revealed your relationship to this case I would have better understood your tactics to portray Waldoboro as a center of small town crime in the midcoast area, and your portrayal of Curtis' behavior on the night in question.
As it is now stands, I find your earlier posts deceptive and only made in an attempt to defend your client - as you are now attempting to do in the general media. You have revealed yourself to be yet another low-life lawyer who prefers innuendo in the media to the procedings of the courtroom.
charlie:
You have every right to say what you say. By the way, what did you mean by:
"Local cops who view one part of the local citizenry differently and treat them differently should not be cops!"
It depends on who the "local citizenry" are, doesn't it? If someone habitually breaks pretty important laws, or has certain issues with reality, shouldn't cops deal with that person differently, because of what they know about him? I thought that was the point of community policing and the new training on handling the mentally ill.
What you describe seems to be secondary intention -- using the position and badge as an excuse to get those with whom they disagree. Sure, that's bad.
I know from personal experience that when I was younger and had longer hair, I was treated differently by cops when stopped for traffic offenses then when I am stopped for the same thing now.
vs. Joe Average, TJC. Joe's suckin' hind teat in this.
charlie
Country:
Interesting argument -- "I never read anything you write, so what you've written since 2000 in probably 500 posts to a couple dozen people doesn't count -- to me."
Your stupidity and woodenheadhedness doesn't equal deception on my part. Ah hell, If i'd just said stuff as stupid as you have to me, I'd get a little mad too. I'm not so sure I'd take it out on the guy who made me look stupid. I'd just try to look a little less stupid next time.
So you might keep that in mind.
I know one thing - I am staying away from you, tjc. After your post I never want to be the focus of your displeasure. This is just a forum, after all.
I know from personal experience that when I was younger and had longer hair, I was treated differently by cops when stopped for traffic offenses then when I am stopped for the same thing now.
I drive cars a LOT. I drive them right into the ground. Eventually they look old and tired and have the hubcaps missing, etc.
I call them "cop magnets."
Of course the registration is current, the car is inspected I am sober and not breaking any laws, but it is a real PIA when I know the cop is BS'ing me about why he pulled me over, especially when he starts with the cop attitude thing, demanding ID from my minor kids in the car and busting my onions if I ask him why he is doing this.
When I get to the point with a car that I am being pulled over 3 times a week, or more than twice I night I know it is time to get rid of the junker.
Anyway, when this story broke, I kind of figured tjc would start getting busy.
Country:
Interesting argument -- "I never read anything you write, so what you've written since 2000 in probably 500 posts to a couple dozen people doesn't count -- to me." Your stupidity and woodenheadhedness doesn't equal deception on my part. Ah hell, If i'd just said stuff as stupid as you have to me, I'd get a little mad too. I'm not so sure I'd take it out on the guy who made me look stupid. I'd just try to look a little less stupid next time.
So you might keep that in mind.
Though what you wrote makes little sense to me, after all I am stupid and woodenheaded, I will keep it in mind - but, I think I may bring your posts in this thread to the attention of our town manager and selectmen.
Tom: Good point. I was also driving beaters when I was younger, and do not now. That is also likely a factor in the different treatment by cops.
I will keep it in mind - and I think I may bring your posts in this thread to the attention of our town manager and selectmen.
Sounds like an act that may result in banishment from AMG.
Sounds like an act that may result in banishment from AMG.
Why should that happen? I'm not revealing anyone's identity and this is all available for viewing by the public.
skf ?
Virtually EVERYBODY here at AMG has known for the better part of 7 years that I happily, frequently, zealously represent cops, and NEVER take cases against them.
This seems to be the most self-centered arrogant post I have read here in years. Personally I never paid any attention to your posts as I am sure you haven't read mine to any degree. I can't believe that you take yourself that seriously.
Waldoboro has a population of about 5000, with nearly 4000 registered voters.
This week's Waldoboro PD report in the Lincoln County News consists of - failure to show proof of insurance/failure to provide proof of insurance/disorderly conduct and probation violation/report of residential theft/possession of a useable amount of marijuana/criminal mischief/theft of $20 medication/theft of skidder chains/theft of I-Pod/ violation of conditional release.
Does this appear to be "much more" than our "share of criminal stuff" for a town of 5000? Do you detect a crime wave in the above report?
I guess that is an acceptable "share of criminal stuff". :)
For those who might like to know, Officer David Payne's daughter is a red-haired beauty who is also a new bride. His son is a college student. His widow, my sweet cousin Karen, is remarried and has given his children the gift of a wonderful father to finish what David began.
tjc, sorry I didn't read your post on page 2 where you linked to David's story.
I have mentioned that before, I guess you weren't reading my posts.
Mr. Chapman,
I'm puzzled by something you wrote in an earlier post - underlining is mine.
Yup, I was THERE, and RIGHT THERE, not long afterward, though obviously after the AGs got done with the scene, including them altering it a bit (for what I understand may have been good reasons). Most people who read this board don't need to ask how I know this stuff. Charlie, for all his reflexive antipathy toward cops, at least knows what side I am on, and why.
Could you explain what you mean by "them altering it a bit" and what the reasons may have been?
Country says RE: TJC - "You have revealed yourself to be yet another low-life lawyer who prefers innuendo in the media to the procedings of the courtroom".
My read on this is as follows: It has been TJC saying throughout this thread that there is "more to the story" than has been posted by "armchair quarterbacks" here, in the media, and in other forums. If anything, he is attempting to quash unfounded and baseless assertions and speculation which some are presenting as fact. He is advocating letting the facts come out in the investigation (and court room if appropriate) rather than fueling uniformed and idiotic supposition by a plethura of people who are not aware of what really happened on the roadside and in the woods that night, the particulars of the lawfulness of the use of deadly force by LEOs according to statute, the application of deadly force in this particular scenario, nor the tactical situation which emerged that night which caused Officer Curtis to do what every cop spends a career seeking to avoid - but unfortunately can not always avoid.
I also know that TJC is not a "low-life lawyer". He is accomplished and capable at what he does. He is not a "guarenteed mouthpiece" for police. I personally know of cases in which TJC has declined to try to "get a cop off" because the facts involved indicated that maybe the cop had done wrong.
I don't know what happened in the woods in Waldoboro that night. I was not there, nor were any of you. I do know, however, that despite what we, as "nice people" and "law abiding citizens" might hope, police officers are duty-bound to enforce the law. They are sometimes confronted by situations in which deadly force is the outcome. The investigation and subsequent scrutiny will shed light on what happened and why. In the meantime, I am willing to give pause to thoughtfully consider the fact that I have (fortunately) never been involved in a fight for my very life and existence. I am also saddened by the fact that Officer Curtis was forced to take a life while doing a job few of you would ever want to do.
I would also remember that police officers face deadly dangers from "unarmed" people on all too frequent a basis...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGMgCk7Y5Ok
By the way... a "choke hold" such as that used by the officer in the above video is "deadly force" in Maine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opkd7Gw1Z78
The officer above survived due to a bystander intervening.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kX1Oer2EGu8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaGlH6jmuCI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMNRUmmNwHw&mode=related&search=
El Cabrito - some wise words, thank you.
My read on this is as follows: It has been TJC saying throughout this thread that there is "more to the story" than has been posted by "armchair quarterbacks" here, in the media, and in other forums. If anything, he is attempting to quash unfounded and baseless assertions and speculation which some are presenting as fact.
Who here has tried to present, "unfounded and baseless assertions and speculation" as fact? It seems to me that Mr. Chapman has taken the lead in making remarks in an attempt to prejudice the case in the media.
If you care to read the most reasonable post yet on this thread (by a former police officer) I suggest you read Towncrier's post on this page.
Mr. Chapman is doing neither himself, nor his client, any favors by the posts he has made here, and yours does little to help him.
PS. Sorry to disagree with you Lucky.
nah, Country, that's why I said some rather than all. :)
Too bad the thread has taken this turn.
El Cabrito writes...
He is not a "guarenteed mouthpiece" for police.
Yet Mr. Chapman has written in earlier posts...
Virtually EVERYBODY here at AMG has known for the better part of 7 years that I happily, frequently, zealously represent cops, and NEVER take cases against them.
Most people who read this board don't need to ask how I know this stuff. Charlie, for all his reflexive antipathy toward cops, at least knows what side I am on, and why.
Too bad the thread has taken this turn.
Threads that Country posts in too often take a nasty turn.
Lucky -
I made my first post on this thread to give people at AMG a sense of what people in Waldoboro were thinking about this. Then Chapman got into it (without telling us the nature of his involvement) and running down Waldoboro as some little town with an extraordinary crime rate. Sorry, but I couldn't just sit around and let this jerk get away with that.
PS. Dan, does the truth hurt? I still remember your sad involvement in the misguided media blitz against Chris Hall. Probably you and Chapman are like two peas in a pod.
To post what I think of some recent comments would be redundant - what I mean to say is that I am sorry this thread has moved away from Dan's original intent and potential interest.
PS. Dan, does the truth hurt? I still remember your sad involvement in the misguided media blitz against Chris Hall. Probably you and Chapman are like two peas in a pod.
Of course, we don't know the "truth" about you because you hide in the shadows.
My guess is your claimed expertise in energy was gained doing a lot of reading while doing a long bid in Thomaston.
- Login to post comments
Country:
It also casts considerable light on people (you in particular) who suggest (as you did here) that I know nothing of the event. I have submitted my involvement to the PPH, so I cannot be much more open than putting my relationship in the largest paper in Maine, now can I? If you had been reading what I posted SINCE 2000, you would have come across titbits like this, from Wingman:
"From what ya tell here on AMG, ya got a lot invested in ya police work. "
One of my sparring buddies here posted this 01 Jan 2001 16:45, according to the search function here at AMG. Virtually EVERYBODY here at AMG has known for the better part of 7 years that I happily, frequently, zealously represent cops, and NEVER take cases against them. Are you saying you had no idea? That bespeaks a very impressive level of ignorance. Sometimes people ask whether I am involved with a case. I tell them yes, no, or (and I have yet to do this) "I can't say". You never asked. Now you know, because I made a choice that intentionally resulted in statewide disclosure.
I had a choice about whether or not to represent the town and Officer Curtis. Since they have a policy AGAINST the unjustified use of deadly force, I could not do so if I had any reason to believe that Officer Curtis violated that policy. I would NOT have had that choice if I had misgivings about the use of force in this case.
I will say this -- I had a good laugh at your (in context) horribly wrongheaded post saying:
"And what leads you to believe you know what you're talking about? Were you there, or is this armchair speculation from the city of Portland?"
Yup, I was THERE, and RIGHT THERE, not long afterward, though obviously after the AGs got done with the scene, including them altering it a bit (for what I understand may have been good reasons). Most people who read this board don't need to ask how I know this stuff. Charlie, for all his reflexive antipathy toward cops, at least knows what side I am on, and why.