Harless to get job back

I outlined in an earlier post what crimes he committed. That no charges have been brought do not mean that no crime has been committed, just that no one is bothering to bring the charges. If one goes into a bank, points a gun at the teller, demands money from the bank that is not his, and leaves the bank with the money, he has committed a crime. That charges have not been brought does not mean he has not committed a crime. Very often, charges in such a case are never brought or not brought for a long period of time. The reasons vary and include, not knowing who the person was, not bringing the charges because other avenues are being pursued (e.g. he is being charged with other crimes in other jurisdictions), etc.

Again, that charges are not brought does not mean that no crime has been committed. If he did this to me, I'd be pursuing criminal charges--and being a world-class pain in the *** until they are pressed. I somehow suspect you would too. But this didn't happen to you.

Moving on. Despicable defenses of this despicable officer don't warrant any more of my effort. Shame.

I would cheer if Harless were prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to the maximum penalty. Which, by the way, would take care of the issue of his continued employment. (Which would have already been taken care of if the PD management had followed proper procedures for progressive punishment, instead of letting him skate until he put them on the political hot seat.)

The union can't arrest him, and can't file charges against him. Is that their fault too?

Silly question and a non sequitur.

What they choose to do is their fault. They chose to advocate for a criminal and put him back on the force where it is quite probable he will carry out his threat someday and kill some poor citizen. Shame on the union and shame on anyone who supports such immoral action by them.

I bet Harless spends the rest of his days at a desk job for Canton PD. he will stay there till he gets his fat pension. The union once again keeps a crappy employee from being terminated. Once again the tax payers will continue to pay for dead weight on the payroll. If the employers were at fault for Harlesse's actions, then fire his bosses with him. Don't keep the ****, in the punch bowl because the bowl is cracked. Toss it out bowl and all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If he were just a crappy employee, that would be different. That would be between the greedy union and the stupid employer who let the union get greedy.

He was a cop. The lives of innocent citizens were in the hands of this temperamental and juvenile nutjob. The union has helped put him back in that situation. Someone could die as a result.

Worse, he is a criminal. His actions meet the definition of assault and conspiracy. He hasn't been charged with a crime, but that does not mean that he did not commit one. And, again, the union is complicit in putting this criminal back on the force.

Citizen said:

It also tells you the mentality of the people in the decision-making process who would give back that badge.

Click to expand...

In the articles I've read, even the union admitted he's not fit to be an officer.
Hopefully his evaluation for return to duty will include mental assessment. That will definitely knock him out of the running.

eye95 said:

This man behaved criminally... Cops should be fired and jailed the first time they commit an act as egregious as this one.

Click to expand...

Because of his job, he knew or should reasonably be expected to know that assault with a deadly weapon is a felony, so he has absolutely no excuse.
I've heard officers complain about being held to a higher standard... if they want to be placed on a pedestal, have privileges & super powers that no common mortal possesses, and their job includes knowing laws, absolutely they should be held to a higher standard.

Can't find it now but I read an article where his lawyer said Harless doesn't want his job back.......... He wants a disability retirement; why work if you can freeload!


If he does get a disability retirement for mental problems I hope he goes on the NICS bad list.

eye95 said:

Silly question and a non sequitur.

What they choose to do is their fault. They chose to advocate for a criminal and put him back on the force where it is quite probable he will carry out his threat someday and kill some poor citizen. Shame on the union and shame on anyone who supports such immoral action by them.

Click to expand...

Having been there, I can tell you that I advocate for the law, not the employee.

There are laws that govern the process, you know. If you advocate ignoring the laws in order to get the outcome you want, then you have the same mindset as a bad cop like Harless.

When I've served as an advocate, if I for a moment was tempted to "just let this one slide" because the employee really should be fired, I simply reminded myself that it would be no different than turning my head while the bad employee violated someone's rights.

We either follow the law, or we don't.

Bull. The law was USED to do an obvious injustice. Again, this guy is a criminal. If the law had been followed, he'd be in jail.

Sugar coat it however you want, but this guy got a pass to the extent that he will benefit from his wanton criminality--and the union helped him do it.

Again, shame on the union, and shame on those who would defend the union's actions.

KBCraig said:

We either follow the law, or we don't.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, "we" the helots, are the ONLY ones required to obey the law. The police do as they wish with no consequences.

NOBODY should believe for one instant that police unions "advocate for the law". It's utter nonsense.

The truth is that the police union doesn't care WHAT a cop has done, or WHAT disciplinary process has been followed. They want that cop kept on the job and any "punishment" kept to a ludicrous minimum. That's why the Chicago FOP went on NPR in 1996 to DEMAND that cops convicted of domestic violence be EXEMPT from laws which disarm convicted batterers. There was no talk of "process" or "treating everyone the same". In fact, their argument was exactly the OPPOSITE. They believe that two men who beat their wives should be treated DIFFERENTLY, only on the basis that one of them has a BADGE.

Police unions are every bit as evil as NAMBLA and do a thousand times as much real harm to this society.

Deanimator said:

Unfortunately, "we" the helots, are the ONLY ones required to obey the law. The police do as they wish with no consequences.

Click to expand...

And they do what they want with no consequences because we the people allow it. Where's the storm of people outside the Canton's prosecutor's office demanding charges be brought against Harless? An Officer can rape a woman on duty and get away with it if she's not willing to pursue charges. Officers can stop every vehicle driving on I-71 at the 99 mile marker and search every one until the people stand up for it and demand that it stop. In this case of Harless....I saw NOBODY besides a bunch of people on forums demanding criminal charges. I saw no news articles from people demanding action against Harless. You can do all the talk, but talk is useless, action is effective.

Deanimator said:

NOBODY should believe for one instant that police unions "advocate for the law". It's utter nonsense.

Click to expand...

It's not their job to advocate for the law. It's their job to advocate for equal discipline. If throughout the history of a police department, every time an officer gets a DUI, they are suspended for 5 days, you can't suspend Office Smith for 10 days because you don't like him. They advocate for the 5 day suspension only and I've yet to see a union ask for less punishment than others have had for equal infractions.

Deanimator said:

Police unions are every bit as evil as NAMBLA and do a thousand times as much real harm to this society.

Click to expand...

They don't do the harm to society. The management that picks favorites does harm to society. I've seen it myself with favoritism given to certain officers. They can get away with anything and nothing is ever done. So when the officer steps even further over the line, still, nothing will be done.


Again, I don't morally think Harless should have his job back, but the arbitrator did add the stipulation that he has to be medically cleared for duty. To do that, he's going to have to throw out the six months of work he's done of trying for a disability retirement. And for that, I'm sure he's had numerous doctors say he has a disability. He'll have a hard battle now trying to get his job back as the pension board will put heavy questions on if he really had a disability.

JediSkipdogg said:

It's not their job to advocate for the law. It's their job to advocate for equal discipline. If throughout the history of a police department, every time an officer gets a DUI, they are suspended for 5 days, you can't suspend Office Smith for 10 days because you don't like him. They advocate for the 5 day suspension only and I've yet to see a union ask for less punishment than others have had for equal infractions.

Click to expand...

I'm again pointing out the VERY important fact that the welfare and indeed the physical safety of the public figure NOWHERE in the considerations of the police unions. As far as they're concerned, Harless could shoot five people a day, execution style... just so long as they're not cops.

JediSkipdogg said:

They don't do the harm to society.

Click to expand...

They do incredible harm to society. Their ONLY goal is to keep cops on the job, NO MATTER WHAT. Hence their demand in Chicago that cops who beat their wives brains out be allowed to own and carry firearms when nobody else would.

JediSkipdogg said:

Again, I don't morally think Harless should have his job back, but the arbitrator did add the stipulation that he has to be medically cleared for duty. To do that, he's going to have to throw out the six months of work he's done of trying for a disability retirement. And for that, I'm sure he's had numerous doctors say he has a disability. He'll have a hard battle now trying to get his job back as the pension board will put heavy questions on if he really had a disability.

Click to expand...

Harless got his job back. I have no pollyannish notions that they won't put back in his hands a gun and the [now] virtually unlimited authority to use it.

Canton is effectively now Waziristan with bars.

Deanimator said:

Harless got his job back. I have no pollyannish notions that they won't put back in his hands a gun and the [now] virtually unlimited authority to use it.

Canton is effectively now Waziristan with bars.

Click to expand...

Actually, he hasn't gotten his job back. He can only get it back if he's medically cleared. I haven't seen anything that said he obtained that status yet and that he dropped his application for disability. If he's medically clear why can't he go back to the job? We do it every day with rapers and murderers when we let them out on parole because they have been "reformed."

The arbitrator added that stipulation of medically clear for a reason. Now Harless just has to meet it.

JediSkipdogg said:

Actually, he hasn't gotten his job back. He can only get it back if he's medically cleared. I haven't seen anything that said he obtained that status yet and that he dropped his application for disability. If he's medically clear why can't he go back to the job? We do it every day with rapers and murderers when we let them out on parole because they have been "reformed."

The arbitrator added that stipulation of medically clear for a reason. Now Harless just has to meet it.

Click to expand...

If he cannot be medically cleared, he will be deemed to have lost his employment due to disability. That'll mean he'll get a disability check either for the rest of his life or until he is once again endangering the public under the color of law.

Either way, we lose.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

KBCraig said:

Having been there, I can tell you that I advocate for the law, not the employee.

Click to expand...

Deanimator said:

NOBODY should believe for one instant that police unions "advocate for the law". It's utter nonsense.

Click to expand...

Hmmm.

Someone with thinner skin might take being called a liar rather personally, but I'll just point out that ad hominem attacks are a violation of the forum rules.

I don't for one second believe that police unions advocate for the law. But I also don't think for one second that disagreeing with someone's take on something amounts to calling him a liar. To think that disagreement amounts to calling someone a liar does require awfully thin skin--or no small measure of misperception.

BTW, the above is a disagreement, not calling anyone a liar. Just calling them wrong.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

eye95 said:

If he cannot be medically cleared, he will be deemed to have lost his employment due to disability. That'll mean he'll get a disability check either for the rest of his life or until he is once again endangering the public under the color of law.

Either way, we lose.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

Yep" we lose and foot the bill for it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

KBCraig said:

Hmmm.

Someone with thinner skin might take being called a liar rather personally, but I'll just point out that ad hominem attacks are a violation of the forum rules.

Click to expand...

Contradicting you may violate YOUR "rules" but not those of OCDO.

JediSkipdogg said:

...We do it every day with rapers and murderers when we let them out on parole because they have been "reformed."...

Click to expand...

Was Harless ever "in" to get "reformed" and pass the muster of a parole board?

MAC702 said:

Was Harless ever "in" to get "reformed" and pass the muster of a parole board?

Click to expand...

No, but Harless also was not convicted of rape or murder so both of you have have flown the coop...