This isn't limited to city police.  It's police in college towns too.  I think a lot of guys want to be taken seriously so bad, become a police officer to finally be able to order and push people around, but then they get disrespectful looks from pretty much everyone.  I had a Columbus police officer spit in my face after he realized he had handcuffed the wrong guy and gave me a big ridiculous lecture.  I had to do everything to keep from laughing at him and look like I was scared of him.  That's what he wanted -- that temporary power over someone.

 

I agree with you about the police in college towns.  I believe everyone I know in Cedar Falls, IA and Iowa City, IA has received a public intoxication after walking out the bars in their respective districts, without causing a ruckus, just getting their quota. 

 

I knew a guy that played in the NFL and was back in town training.  He went over to a pizza spot / bar at around 1:45 am and went to open the door, thought it was stuck and pulled harder and it broke the latch.  The alarm went off and he waited for the police to arrive because he felt bad and didn't realize he broke the door, so he wanted to pay for it and settle with the pizza place.  Well the cops came and must have been freaked out he was 6'5" and 330 lbs., and they arrested him and charged him with public intoxication because he blew over the legal limit but didn't charge him with any vandalism charges, etc. 

 

Does the Cincinnati Police department ever hand out a lot of public intox charges like that?  I don't think I have ever witnessed someone being arrested outside of the bars since I have been in Cincinnati, and I am guessing it is because they don't have the time / resources to arrest bar goers for being over the legal limit especially when they are walking home or hopping in a cab.  In college, you would witness people being arrested for public intoxication almost every Thursday, Friday and Saturday even though they were always mere blocks from their residence.

 

I don't think the CPD gives out many charges for public intoxication. I saw the UCPD give them out fairly regularly when I was a student, though they typically would strive to make sure people got home safely and stayed put. It's actually one of the main reasons UCPD patrols off campus - to deal with rowdy college parties and kids who can't handle their first beer. CPD has better things to worry about. I really hope UCPD is allowed to patrol the streets near campus when school starts back up in a few weeks.

Functionally, I don't think it matters much whether UCPD exists or CPD creates a special policing district that focuses on problems on/near campus. I would probably prefer the latter so there aren't two different sets of rules for police in the Uptown area and so that the University doesn't have to deal with micromanaging a police department with a bad reputation. If UCPD does remain, they should follow the exact same training procedures as CPD and they should have additional training to prepare them for campus specific problems.

 

I think the unique campus issues can be dealt with in a special district of CPD. For now, UCPD shouldn't be pulling people over for infractions that pose no risk to the public. They should be allowed to patrol the streets and respond to calls of muggings, theft, property damage, loud parties, etc. If they see someone speeding, running red lights, or driving erratically/drunk they should pull them over. They shouldn't be looking to make money off of tickets though.

This isn't limited to city police.  It's police in college towns too.  I think a lot of guys want to be taken seriously so bad, become a police officer to finally be able to order and push people around, but then they get disrespectful looks from pretty much everyone.  I had a Columbus police officer spit in my face after he realized he had handcuffed the wrong guy and gave me a big ridiculous lecture.  I had to do everything to keep from laughing at him and look like I was scared of him.  That's what he wanted -- that temporary power over someone.

 

I agree with you about the police in college towns.  I believe everyone I know in Cedar Falls, IA and Iowa City, IA has received a public intoxication after walking out the bars in their respective districts, without causing a ruckus, just getting their quota. 

 

I knew a guy that played in the NFL and was back in town training.  He went over to a pizza spot / bar at around 1:45 am and went to open the door, thought it was stuck and pulled harder and it broke the latch.  The alarm went off and he waited for the police to arrive because he felt bad and didn't realize he broke the door, so he wanted to pay for it and settle with the pizza place.  Well the cops came and must have been freaked out he was 6'5" and 330 lbs., and they arrested him and charged him with public intoxication because he blew over the legal limit but didn't charge him with any vandalism charges, etc. 

 

Does the Cincinnati Police department ever hand out a lot of public intox charges like that?  I don't think I have ever witnessed someone being arrested outside of the bars since I have been in Cincinnati, and I am guessing it is because they don't have the time / resources to arrest bar goers for being over the legal limit especially when they are walking home or hopping in a cab.  In college, you would witness people being arrested for public intoxication almost every Thursday, Friday and Saturday even though they were always mere blocks from their residence.

 

I don't think the CPD gives out many charges for public intoxication. I saw the UCPD give them out fairly regularly when I was a student, though they typically would strive to make sure people got home safely and stayed put. It's actually one of the main reasons UCPD patrols off campus - to deal with rowdy college parties and kids who can't handle their first beer. CPD has better things to worry about. I really hope UCPD is allowed to patrol the streets near campus when school starts back up in a few weeks.

 

Cincinnati Police have always patrolled CUF, Corryville, etc., much more than has UC Police.  As you know I live in the area and have worked almost every weekend night in the area for the past 6 years.  I'd be surprised if my impression was proven wrong by statistics.  Sometimes I see so many CPD officers patrolling in vehicles, on segways, and on mountain bikes that I'm in disbelief that anyone successfully caries out a crime of opportunity. 

 

What's comical about this situation is that all sorts of suburban commentators on Facebook and on The Enquirer's site are self-declared experts on the supposed omnipresent dangers around the UC campus, yet few spend more than 5 hours a year anywhere close to UC.  I'm there literally *all the time* yet they quickly discount my opinion. 

 

I do not feel that the CPD special district is a realistic proposal. Deters was acting as a politician and was way out of his league when he suggested such a thing. As far as I know, no one has seriously considered it. I also don't think UC is micro-managing a police department. UC has more students than most cities in the state of Ohio have residents. They are far more capable of supporting a police department than many cities.

 

In regard to traffic violations, if they occur in an area heavily populated by UC students, there's no reason UCPD shouldn't be expected to enforce the law. As far as the Dubose pullover, had it not ended up in the tragic manner it did, it would have been a great stop. If the license plate was the only illegal thing Dubose had going on at the time, the stop would have probably ended with a warning.  As it was, Dubose was breaking a myriad of laws, including felony possession. The stop would have resulted in an active felon being taken into custody. That is often the case with many stops for minor infractions – question that practice if you want, but I approve of it. I’ve even been a victim of it myself on two occasions when I lived in NYC. No warnings were even given to me, as I wasn’t even committing any minor infraction - I was just a white guy in the wrong neighborhood.

 

Shot 3 times in a couple months?  That is waaaaaaay outside the norm.  The overwhelmingly vast majority of Cleveland cops won't even be shot at their entire career, let alone shot.

 

Projects near Woodland/Woodhill...  Quincy/105...  Buckeye/MLK

 

Still very extreme case.  I would guess totally unique.  If a total of 3 cops a year took a bullet in the course of duty in the City, I would be surprised.  The same cop three times over three months.... sheesh.  How did he even return to duty so fast after the first two to take a third?

I think gottaplan[/member] said "shot AT" in his original post.

^Ah.  My bad

Being shot 3 times in as many months would be pretty amazing, even for Cleveland.

Ticking time bomb?

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/hamilton-county/cincinnati/ray-tensing-beaten-in-2010-fight-seemed-like-ticking-time-bomb-attorney-says

 

The problem is that *a lot* of police officers become police officers because of an inferiority complex and other emotional issues that have haunted them their entire lives. 

 

 

What do you have that supports yet another ridiculous claim?

I'll answer for him. Nothing. That's how Jake operates though. Bursts into the conversation, spouts off some anecdotal BS as if it is fact, and then never provides a stitch of quantifiable evidence to back the claim up. It's all ridiculous.

 

The idea that cops become cops because of an inferiority complex is a made up rhetoric that is used to explain random police violence and the misuse of power. And when you have to fabricate a reason then you've lost the ability to solve the problem.

You don’t have to delve too deeply into the psychology of power to find evidence that people do often seek out positions of power in order to compensate for other shortcomings or emotional problems. The classic example is the school yard bully. And of course, there’s plenty of evidence that power corrupts, as there are sociologists who have been exploring the concept for hundreds of years. The only real question is how many cops would you agree is “a lot.”

Nobody would ever deny there are people with inferiority complexes who take advantage of power. That's part of the human condition. But your last sentence hints on the problem. We don't see the cops who don't have this problem in the spotlight because they don't do things that get them there. Therefore it looks like a disproportional amount have this complex and in that regard there is no evidence to support the idea that cops are somehow more likely than others to have this inferiority complex.

A lot of cops have military backgrounds.  Veterans are given a huge 'leg up' on civil service entrance exams.  That is usually a good thing.  Sometimes, especially now with so many young veterans having combat experience, it can be a terrible idea, depending on how the candidate for appointment is dealing with the psychological consequences of war. 

Ticking time bomb?

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/hamilton-county/cincinnati/ray-tensing-beaten-in-2010-fight-seemed-like-ticking-time-bomb-attorney-says

 

The problem is that *a lot* of police officers become police officers because of an inferiority complex and other emotional issues that have haunted them their entire lives. 

 

 

What do you have that supports yet another ridiculous claim?

 

Real life. 

 

Read: Anecdotal evidence based off personal experiences.

 

I.E. Meaningless in a larger conversation about national police tactics.

Ticking time bomb?

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/hamilton-county/cincinnati/ray-tensing-beaten-in-2010-fight-seemed-like-ticking-time-bomb-attorney-says

 

The problem is that *a lot* of police officers become police officers because of an inferiority complex and other emotional issues that have haunted them their entire lives. 

 

 

What do you have that supports yet another ridiculous claim?

 

Real life. 

 

 

This reminds me of the 60 year old white guys on the Enquirer comments who put their work as "School of Hard Knocks".

Read: Anecdotal evidence based off personal experiences.

 

I.E. Meaningless in a larger conversation about national police tactics.

 

Are personal experiences not real, factual things?  Just because there are no videos of myself being harassed by the police doesn't mean that those events didn't occur and that there's not a pattern of such behavior across the nation.  The internet is becoming increasingly populated with videos of police massively overreacting to mild situations.  In ten years many of those who today believe the police are above reproach might be whistling a different tune. 

 

No, but it doesn't do anything for painting a big picture. Those events occurring don't prove cops are power hungry people with inferiority complexes. All they prove is that you have encountered some that fit this description. The idea though that cops are somehow more likely than other people to have this inferiority complex cannot be backed up by anecdotal evidence.

Anecdote ≠ Data

 

Just because something is observed, even well documented or supposedly repeatable, that doesn't mean it's necessarily a representation of the norm.  Whether that's cops shooting people or cyclists falling by themselves or plane or train crashes, we notice and remember and focus on these things precisely because they're *UN*usual.  Because of that they get a disproportionate amount of coverage and seem like they're much more pervasive than they are.  That doesn't mean they aren't necessarily problems, especially when the result is someone losing their life, but these are not typical situations. 

No, but it doesn't do anything for painting a big picture. Those events occurring don't prove cops are power hungry people with inferiority complexes. All they prove is that you have encountered some that fit this description. The idea though that cops are somehow more likely than other people to have this inferiority complex cannot be backed up by anecdotal evidence.

 

Let's assume for the moment that a similar percentage of people who want to kick random people's ass appear evenly in every profession ranging from florist to street entertainer.  The difference between any occupation out there and someone in law enforcement is that they have a badge and they have weapons up to and including firearms.  There's a limit to what a bad florist or a bad mime can do to you.  But a bad cop can literally send your life into a tailspin because you don't answer his hard-charging flip-out with a facial expression that makes him feel good about himself for a few seconds. 

 

 

 

 

^ Actually, there is no limit to what a bad mime can do to you.

No, but it doesn't do anything for painting a big picture. Those events occurring don't prove cops are power hungry people with inferiority complexes. All they prove is that you have encountered some that fit this description. The idea though that cops are somehow more likely than other people to have this inferiority complex cannot be backed up by anecdotal evidence.

 

Let's assume for the moment that a similar percentage of people who want to kick random people's ass appear evenly in every profession ranging from florist to street entertainer.  The difference between any occupation out there and someone in law enforcement is that they have a badge and they have weapons up to and including firearms.  There's a limit to what a bad florist or a bad mime can do to you.  But a bad cop can literally send your life into a tailspin because you don't answer his hard-charging flip-out with a facial expression that makes him feel good about himself for a few seconds. 

 

You don't need a badge and a weapon to do something like this. It happens more often than not by people who don't risk their lives to help the community. Do you need to see the statistics of murders? Where do you think cops fall in that stat? Looks to me like its others who have a inferior complex.

 

You were harassed by the police because you most likely deserved it.

"Victim blaming" ;)

No, but it doesn't do anything for painting a big picture. Those events occurring don't prove cops are power hungry people with inferiority complexes. All they prove is that you have encountered some that fit this description. The idea though that cops are somehow more likely than other people to have this inferiority complex cannot be backed up by anecdotal evidence.

 

Let's assume for the moment that a similar percentage of people who want to kick random people's ass appear evenly in every profession ranging from florist to street entertainer.  The difference between any occupation out there and someone in law enforcement is that they have a badge and they have weapons up to and including firearms.  There's a limit to what a bad florist or a bad mime can do to you.  But a bad cop can literally send your life into a tailspin because you don't answer his hard-charging flip-out with a facial expression that makes him feel good about himself for a few seconds. 

 

You don't need a badge and a weapon to do something like this. It happens more often than not by people who don't risk their lives to help the community. Do you need to see the statistics of murders? Where do you think cops fall in that stat? Looks to me like its others who have a inferior complex.

 

You were harassed by the police because you most likely deserved it.

 

Do you really not see the difference between someone in a fairly benign position giving you a hard time or being a dick to you vs a cop who is granted almost complete authority over you, and can treat you essentially however he pleases with little fear of consequence? I hope, for your sake, that you never find yourself in an encounter with a police officer who's over zealous or down right combative. 

 

The end of your comment makes you sound like a real jerk. You also believe that Eric Garner, John Crawford, Sam Dubose and Tamir Rice deserved to be harassed (killed) too, huh?

Murders has taken a nosedive the 2nd half of the year compared to the first.

How many are we at this year so far? And how many were we at at this point last year?

Through 8/8, we are at 45, 1 over the pace of last year.  http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/police/crime-statistics/

 

 

Sooooo all the doom and gloom from the media about the number this year was unfounded?

Through 8/29, the number of homicides is 48, compared with 50 at the same time last year.  Down slightly.

 

To be clear, though, that does not necessarily take into account shootings.  Not sure where to find numbers on that.  It does seem like there were more shootings, though not necessarily resulting in deaths (thankfully). 

Multiple media outlets reporting that the City Manager has fired Chief Blackwell.

A lot of accusations about Blackwell. I honestly don't think the rank and file gave him an opportunity from the start. Cranley wanted him gone before he took office.

 

Blackwell seemed to be loved by the community but hated by the officers/mayor. Not sure if this is because he wasn't from Cincinnati, but I would suspect that is the case. Craig received a lot of backlash from the officers but luckily for him he had a mayor who supported him.

 

Also, I don't trust FOP President Kathy Harrell.

Even Scotty Johnson, who made many of the allegations about Blackwell, said as much. Chris Wetterich tweeted as Johnson was speaking:

 

Johnson: It's difficult to come to Cincinnati from the outside. Tight-knit group. "It's a difficult thing to come in and be welcome."

 

Anyway, Blackwell is not going to go quietly:

 

Blackwell: I wasn’t told why I was fired, and I will sue

 

Former Cincinnati police chief Jeffrey Blackwell said he never had the support of Mayor John Cranley and City Manager Harry Black, was not told why he was fired and plans to sue the city over his termination.

 

“I love the people of Cincinnati,” Blackwell said. “I’ve worked very, very hard for the people of this city for two years. I’ve had the support of the White House, the attorney general, the national media … all of the national think tanks in policing, but I could never get the support of John Cranley or Harry Black. And because I never had their support – ever – I was never able to command the department the way it should have been led.”

Took a selfie at a fallen officer funeral? Wtf??

Took a selfie at a fallen officer funeral? Wtf??

 

Supposedly someone he walked past asked to take a photo with him and took a photo with him that is being called this selfie.

Getting national press....

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/09/us/cincinnati-police-chief-jeffrey-blackwell-fired/index.html

 

For one I'm glad. Cranley needs to be tarred and feathered out of Cincinnati. The guy is an ass wipe, and that is putting it very nicely.

Harry Black was just on Cunningham.  He was asked about the supposed "selfie" photo and Harry Black could not confirm the existence of the photo.  Looks like more hot air.  Also, Black's voice hesitated when asked about conversations he had with Cranley over the firing.  Black insists there was barely any conversation. 

 

Also, social media reports that Cranley was overheard in a restaurant last night gloating over having fired Blackwell. 

Funny that in 2013, Candidate Cranley said, "In an ideal world, the next mayor would be able to be instrumental" in the selection of the new police chief. But now they are trying to claim the mayor had nothing to do with firing him, because all the hiring/firing decisions are made by the City Manager.

 

I hope Blackwell does take the city to court over this. There is a ton of evidence that Cranley & Friends didn't want Blackwell in that position and were trying to make his life more difficult all along -- from Cranley's 2013 request that Mallory not hire a new police chief, to the bizarre "resignation" incident earlier this year. There's no way that the timing of the FOP's "no confidence" vote was coincidental... if they can prove that the FOP coordinated with the city on this, it's going to look very bad. Not to mention, the city charter lays out a specific process for removing the police chief once they've passed 6 months of employment, and it does not seem like that process was followed with Blackwell's firing.

 

This further illustrates the problem with the current mayoral system. Since only the Mayor has the power to initiate the City Manager's firing, the City Manager effectively reports to the Mayor and carries out his business. This allows the City Manager to build a political machine by putting the Mayor's cohorts in charge of every department, and yet allows the Mayor to sit back and claim to have nothing to do with that. Meanwhile City Council can do nothing because they do not have the power to fire the City Manager.

I'd bet the FOP didn't have close to the votes to do the "no confidence" vote.  That's why the firing was moved up ahead of that AND public shows of support of Chief Blackwell. 

One thing I would like City Council to do is hold up appointments until someone is vetted. The mayor recommends a city manager. The city manager recommends a police chief. Both have to be approved by council. They shouldn't just rubber stamp appointments if they aren't fully vetted.

Also, I am amazed by the fear people seem to have of Cranley and Black.  They are creative liars but not effective at hiding their body language and not good at controlling their emotions.  Neither are used to being confronted.  Their strength is taking advantage of common courtesy and parliamentary procedure by blowing through it and attempting to re-write it on the fly.  It's one sneak attack after another.  But just confront either head-on and they can't handle it. 

If you confront Cranley either he or Smitherman starts bemoaning about the days under Mallory or how they are a victim in the whole thing.

Is it possible to impeach Cranley?

 

I never donate to anything, but I'd donate to that cause. That, and running him out of this city.

 

He's the worst politician I've ever seen in Ohio, or for that matter the USA.

I don't think there is a method for impeachment. You could always try to pass a City Charter amendment that would specifically oust Cranley, but that wouldn't go into effect until late 2016 at which point he has one year left.

^ I read through the whole charter for the first time in its entirety right after Cranley was elected, trying to answer the same question.  It's an interesting read due to all of the crazy additions over the decades.  There isn't any mechanism for impeachment specifically outlined in the charter, but removal of the mayor is alluded to as a real possibility in the following section.  I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know if this reference without a specific outlined impeachment process means that the mayor can be removed, cannot be removed, or if we have to defer to state law:

 

In the event of the death, removal or resignation of the mayor, the vice-mayor shall succeed to the

office of mayor in accordance with this section. The vice-mayor's vacancy on council shall be filled in

accordance with Article II, Section 4b of this charter and a new vice-mayor shall be selected by the mayor

from the members of the council.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/council/references-resources/city-charter/

 

It may mean that he is unable to perform the duties of mayor (incapacitated, jailed, etc.) but hasn't died or officially resigned. Since we work on a City Charter, I highly doubt we can just pick up pieces of the standard municipality in Ohio when it suits us.

Also, I am amazed by the fear people seem to have of Cranley and Black.  They are creative liars but not effective at hiding their body language and not good at controlling their emotions.  Neither are used to being confronted.  Their strength is taking advantage of common courtesy and parliamentary procedure by blowing through it and attempting to re-write it on the fly.  It's one sneak attack after another.  But just confront either head-on and they can't handle it. 

I can confirm that the fear is real. I used to work for the City, and the sudden removal of directors, and how they are rumored to have been treated, are just incredible.

 

I wouldn't say Cranley is bringing in cronies (too many of Black's friends have been hired) but definitely people that will carry out the mayor's agenda.

 

It is incredible how much the departments have been spending on executive salaries and increasing the number of upper management, spending on new offices, etc.

Well I'm sorry by "people" I meant journalists and others on the outside of City Hall.  Certainly, for someone who was expecting to have a career with the city, the appearance of Cranley and Black is a big problem and they have reason to be worried for their job.  I know one former employee that said Black gave her such a dirty look it creeped her out and she eventually quit because he was stifling her department.  I've dealt with Black outside of city affairs (he doesn't know who I am) and he's an intense dude but if you've worked in toxic work environments where there are no facts and reason and no avenue of recourse then you know their tricks.  Those kind of guys hone in on what they think are your insecurities, they keep knocking you off-balance and attempting to embarrass you in front of coworkers and other management, and block your ability to effectively complain to HR about their behavior by buttering up the HR people and ownership.  In the case of a municipality, HR and ownership is effectively the local media and the general population that reads the paper and listens to talk radio.  What's crazy about them is that they usually aren't able to successfully defend against their exact techniques thrown back at them. 

Speaking of journalists, sources are saying that the Enquirer's Jason Williams was runner up to be Cranley's Director of Communications, behind Kevin Osborne. Of course, Osborne previously worked for WCPO and wrote a bunch of pro-Cranley, anti-Qualls pieces during the campaign, and then was rewarded with the job in Cranley's office.

It may mean that he is unable to perform the duties of mayor (incapacitated, jailed, etc.) but hasn't died or officially resigned. Since we work on a City Charter, I highly doubt we can just pick up pieces of the standard municipality in Ohio when it suits us.

 

Not when it suits us, but rather when the charter doesn't address a given scenario.  It's a fairly common legal quandry.  Example: If the US Constitution doesn't reference a particular power of government, does that mean that such a power is allowed or is prohibited?  Liberals and conservatives have been battling that one out since the country was founded.

 

I would assume that if a city charter fails to address something, you default back to the state's rules for a charterless city, but that's a big assumption.

Well I'm sorry by "people" I meant journalists and others on the outside of City Hall.  Certainly, for someone who was expecting to have a career with the city, the appearance of Cranley and Black is a big problem and they have reason to be worried for their job.  I know one former employee that said Black gave her such a dirty look it creeped her out and she eventually quit because he was stifling her department.  I've dealt with Black outside of city affairs (he doesn't know who I am) and he's an intense dude but if you've worked in toxic work environments where there are no facts and reason and no avenue of recourse then you know their tricks.  Those kind of guys hone in on what they think are your insecurities, they keep knocking you off-balance and attempting to embarrass you in front of coworkers and other management, and block your ability to effectively complain to HR about their behavior by buttering up the HR people and ownership.  In the case of a municipality, HR and ownership is effectively the local media and the general population that reads the paper and listens to talk radio.  What's crazy about them is that they usually aren't able to successfully defend against their exact techniques thrown back at them. 

 

I didn't have a ton of exposure to Black. He was fine in the few meetings I was in. He has his vision and he's not going to let anyone get in the way.

 

It was interesting to move from a confident and calm manager like Dohoney to a micro-manager like Black. Dohoney just assumed that the professionals he hired would do the job that they were hired to do. Black prefers to do it himself.

 

It is my opinion that the new data analytics office is a good idea, but will ultimately do nothing but waste time and money.

 

Back to crime: shootings have been up across the country and Cincinnati is no different. I feel bad for Blackwell. I met him and his assistants and I was amazed at how unprofessional the assistants were. It was incredible. Blackwell had no chance to succeed in that environment.