Tuesday, June 30, 2009What Do The Salisbury Police Do?
"Joe,I've read many of your postings regarding Chief Webster of the Salisbury Police Department and have had an unsettling experience with their detectives myself. My question today is, Why don't the police respond to a resident who is actively witnessing a drug transaction? A friend of mine is trying to rid themselves of drug activity, but when she calls the police, they do nothing. They act as if she is bothering them with the reported activity. I don't understand. Should I advise her to call Sheriff Lewis or do they only handle issues outside of city limits?Confused Citizen"
(Joe's Answer) Well Concerned Citizen, that's a good question. My only answer at this time is, Salisbury is in Wicomico County and you have every right to call the Sheriff's Department. I'd add, contact Davis Ruark as well. After all, he is in charge of all the Police Agencies in Wicomico County.
Our Response: Unfortunately, drugs and crime are obviously rampantly spinning out of control throughout our city and county. While the city police should respond to any 911 call, they must prioritize calls in order of importance. Witnessing a drug transaction, which is unfortunately an everyday occurrence, is not a priority call. Further, an anonymous call is not grounds for probable cause to search a suspect. It is RAS (Reasonable Articulable Suspicion) for stopping, identifying, and developing probable cause for a search. Further, within the city jurisdiction, they handle all city calls for service. The Sheriff's Office, although has concurrent jurisdiction with the city officers, don't routinely respond to calls for service within the city limits. In fact, the county sheriff's office stresses to it's personnel to handle enforcement actions within the county for the most part (this is no big secret as it has been the unofficial policy for years). The Salisbury Police do plenty. They respond to probably four times more calls for service than the county daily. The county has become exponentially busier however statistically, the city runs more calls for service within a months period than the county (and we mean actual calls for service). So, city cops work their butts off. Unfortunately, it's still not enough to curb the crime rate because very little is being done proactively either at the city or county levels. Davis Ruark is not in charge of any police department in actuality nor are they required to comply with his directives or requests on how to run their departments. He is the head "procurator" for the county. Therefore, if the police departments want convictions and prosecutions of their cases, it behoves them to listen to what Davis has to say.
Bear in mind, Davis Ruark is also an elected political official, just like Sheriff Mike Lewis. Ruark and Lewis bumped heads when Ruark was arrested for DUI and having a loaded firearm with him while operating a county vehicle. Lewis advised that he should step down (resign) and rightfully so. Yet he still runs an office that prosecutes DUI's on a routine basis. We do not support Davis Ruark for re-election.
Posts
10 comments:
Once again, it's good to see a proactive Blog that provides answers.
As far as the Lewis/Ruark thing, Mike went on the record and stated his opinion. Ruark chose to continue, face his issues head on and prove to everyone he is worthy of being States Attorney. Frank White did the same thing. These people are human, not super human.
QAs far as Ruark's role, I think you better research that a little further because I believe you're mistaken. Respectfully.
You stated in your response:
" It is RAS (Reasonable Articulable Suspicion) for stopping, identifying, and developing probable cause for a search."
You're absolutely right. It's good to know that there are knowledgeable officers out there who know this. I'm not knocking anyone, I'm just stating that it takes experience to know this. Experience is something that takes time to develop and cannot be viewed as something that a person comes out of the academy knowing at a level that they can put to practical application right away.
Let me take it further though. Developing probable cause is the key here. An officer responding to that call and observing someone fitting the description given is corroberating the witnesses statement to the degree that would permit a stop and frisk under Terry since we all know that drugs and guns go together. If, pursuant to the Terry frisk, the officer feels someting in the pocket, pantleg, etc., an object that is immediately identified by feel as contraband without further manipulation, it's the same as seeing it with your eyes under Minnesota v. Dickerson (plain feel doctrine). My point is that this type of knowledge isn't generally known to the younger, inexperienced officers. It also isn't something patrol officers have time to explore when they're running from call to call. This drives home the point I made in an earlier comment that we need a well trained street level drug interdiction unit that can work independently of the road patrol division yet can handle this type of call when it comes in. The number of arrests and the amount of information that could be obtained by a group like this would be astounding. In fact, The real question shouldn't be "can we afford to do that?" but rather "can we afford NOT to do that?". Or do we do nothing and watch as our neighborhoods currently in transition slip out of our grasp into the abyss that is slum/ghetto?
And Joe - he's right brother. Davis can't do anything other than refuse to prosecute case he determines to be legally insufficient. The Sheriff in any county is the leading law enforcement official.
younger experienced officers huh? Well buddy, you might wanna check how case law works, because unless that case from Minn came from the Supreme Court, it doesn't apply here in MD. And even if it did come from the SC, MD can adopt case law that gives us further restrictions, they just can loosen it. And news flash buddy, they have!! But i wont spoil it for you and tell you what cases. Your the "experienced" one, you look them up. Good luck
Bla Bla Bla...Go to work, screw admin., and remember why you took the oath, & kick ass. There are more losers involved in the Ruark scandle than just him. When you get into the politics and only have a juvenile "Cop" mentality; You Lose. Only a select few will understand this comment. If only the public knew..............
If the sheriff in any county is the leading law enforcement official then please, someone, anyone ask Mike Lewis to come save our city.
"We do not support Davis Ruark for re-election."
Remember the old saying - "be careful what you ask for." First, the Wicomico SAO, although not perfect, is very pro-police and aggressive compared with other SAO's. If you don't believe it, ask any police officer or defense lawyer outside of Wicomico. Second, Davis has built a formidable office that is well-respected elsewhere in the state. There are innovative programs such as diversionary programs and Exile which are imitated in other counties. Third, if you have heard the names of others who may run for SA in 2010, you would change your opinion.
Well that's an interesting opinion but here ours. Davis also has several totally incompetent people working for him which he has made no effort to move or fire. They routinely screw up major cases. Second at least whoever will run in 2010 won't be a convicted person DUI carrying a loaded firearm and driving a government vehicle. Many cops have been fired much much less any citizen would have been seriously hammered. So if the SA can't even live up to the standards of what is expected behavior from the police than poop on him. He is a hypocrite and a lot of cops think he's a complete politition who has abused his powers in office by declining to prosecute cases that don't benefit him politically and chasing tail. Frankly many cops support PAUL MONTEMURO for office. He's not a politician and therefore full of crap and he has consistently been aggressive in prosecuting criminals and is ten times more propolice than davis who is self serving .
Yeah, I heard Andrew MacDonald is going to run
Well Anon - it IS SCOTUS case law. If you are a LEO you should know that. I wasn't knocking younger officers. Don't get your knickers twisted. We all had to be inexperienced when we got started. The point was that the officers assigned to that type of unit MUST be well versed on 4th amendment law. AND, When SCOTUS hands down a decision that gives the officer another tool for the toolbox, a wise and knowledgeable officer can apply the new decision practically and test the waters. It's called a "test case". As long as you're acting reasonably and in good faith you are free from civil liability. But if you're not knowledgeable and properly trained it can cost you. Incidentally, every piece of case law that I found relating to the use Dickerson as a precedent that was overturned failed to meet the constitutional challenge due to one fatal error that the officers consistently made. You see a Terry frisk permits for a search of WEAPONS ONLY. An officer patting down a subject doesn't have to manipulate an object of mass within someones clothing to know that it is a gun or a knife. In the cases I read, the officers squeezed and manipulated the objects with their fingers, an action specifically determined by SCOTUS to be to intrusive for a Terry frisk. The object must be immediately identifiable as contraband by the officer when touched in the same manner necessary to conduct a frisk for weapons. It must be a pat or rub NOT a neading grope. This is specifically the type of training to which I am referring. You should read some of the testimony given by those officers in these cases.
Davis Ruark is not in charge of any law enforcement agency.He shouldn't even be an attorney. He is a LOSER!!!!!!!!!!!
Post a Comment