Strikes me as strange that the Chief believes that he can "rescind" a criminal charge once it has been made. I used to think that was reserved for the prosecutor to decline to bring the charge to trial or for the judge to throw it out (dismiss with prejudice). But I guess the streamlining of the judicial process in an attempt to keep your butt from being sued is better than just sitting there with your head in your hands, moaning about the end of your career.“When they saw the video, their faces went stone-cold and they apologized and said the charges would be rescinded,” Vreeland said in a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime Tuesday night.
He also said they gave him money to purchase a new camera and assured him the incident would be investigated by internal affairs, which is practically unheard of in other departments.
The money the chief gave him - was it out of his own pocket or from some hitherto unknown slush fund used to buy off potential lawsuits? Either way, Loss Prevention (if not LP + HR) might be a tad bit upset at what the chief did and how he did it. Or not - depending on how close to straight arrow those folks are.
Mighty brave of the chief to refer the matter to IA now that he has committed two serious mis-steps himself. Oh, wait! Who does IA report to? Why, the chief, of course.