Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Cpl Michael Wootton Accused of Shooting Neighbor's Dog

What are they thinking up in Essex? A police officer is charged with a crime involving a gun, yet the department fails to immediately relieve him of duty. For the sake of keeping the public's trust, the officer should have been placed on leave until the matter is settled.

Cpl. Michael J. Wootton is accused of shooting and killing a neighbor's dog which was fighting with his own dog and was charged with animal cruelty after a state police investigation. The crime is a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in prison, a fine of up to $2,000 or both.

In a news release issued Tuesday, The Essex Police Department stated in part: "The department continues to review the incident administratively. At this time, Corporal Wootton has not been placed on administrative leave and we cannot comment further due to the ongoing administrative investigation."

This refusal to comment on an investigation into the conduct of a police officer has become an all too familiar refrain that undermines confidence in law enforcement. An employer needs to respect the right of privacy in a personnel matter, but a government has to weigh that right against the public interest, which requires transparency when looking into charges of wrongdoing.

The least the Essex Police Department should do is put the officer at a desk in a job that doesn't involve guns and involves minimal contact with the public until the matter is settled, and let the public know that this action has been taken.

A better move would be to put in him on leave and out of uniform until his court case runs its course, if for no other reason than to reassure the public that the department takes the safety of the public seriously.

We don't know all the circumstances surrounding the shooting of the dog, but the bare facts are enough to raise concern about Wootton's judgment when it comes to the use of his gun. If there are good reasons to allow the officer to remain on duty and carry a gun, they need to be made clear to the public.

Until the concerns can be cleared up -- and without passing judgment on Cpl. Wootton -- the officer should not be placed in an official role that involves carrying a gun.

When a police officer has been charged with a crime, his superiors must do everything it can to protect the reputation of the department and ensure the public's faith in the police. So far, the Essex Police Department's response to the Wootton affair serves neither interest well.
______________________________

http://www.fox44.net/Global/story.asp?S=10347893

No comments: