Examining one cop's remarkable victim impact statement

TKAZ

TKAZ

Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
1,374
Examining one cop's remarkable victim impact statement.

Truer words were never spoken than when Jennifer Moore, a maimed Phoenix police officer faced her attacker in court and said, “You are a worthless piece of ____!”

Although a relative of the gunman who tried to kill her assured the court of “unconditional love” for him, Moore called out the object of that affection for what he truly is. Eyes locked on him, she labeled him for the public record as a plop of barnyard waste that needs to be shoveled from decent society.

Read the rest of the story here.

Stay safe my friends.

-Tim
 
That isn't the sort of language I would expect a professional police officer to use... much less in court. (If you have to blank it out to meet the rules for posting something in the Community Center forum here at bf.c, then it probably isn't appropriate languauge to use in court either.)

I understand her emotions at the time, but part of being a professional police office is learning to control and suppress your emotions and conduct yourself in a professionally-appropriate way. There are plenty of other ways she could have expressed the same feeling without lowering herself -- and taking her department and her profession with her -- into the gutter.

This was unprofessional behavior at a time and under a circumstance, appearing in court, when officers are expected to be at their most professional; she shouldn't be praised for it.
 
Last edited:
he didn't blank anything out.

that is a direct cut/paste from the article.


and you are taking a trememdous leap in suggesting that she and her department are now in the gutter. you may think so, but i would think the majority of people do not agree.
 
Gollnick -- seems like you're pretty quick to pass judgement on this officer and her department. In my opinion, unless you've been wounded in the service of your country or as an LEO in the service of your community, then you have no ground to stand on. How can you say, "I understand her emotions at the time", unless you actually have been in that situation. Pardon me, if you actually have suffered a gunshot wound at the hands of a criminal/enemy combatant. But sans that, I think you should stand down.
 
BrewCity59 said:
... unless you actually have been in that situation.... But sans that, I think you should stand down.
Click to expand...

Been in what situation?

Had my hand shot? Thankfully, no, I have not been in that situation. But that is NOT the situation I am commenting on.

Testified in court? Been there, done that. And that is what I commented on.

Besides, I completely disagree with the idea put forth that somehow nobody else is qualified to comment on -- or, more accurately, criticize since praising is also commenting on -- her conduct as a police officer appearing in court unless that person has had his hand shot. That is just silly thinking.
 
Gollnick said:
Been in what situation?

Had my hand shot? Thankfully, no, I have not been in that situation. But that is NOT the situation I am commenting on.

Testified in court? Been there, done that. And that is what I commented on.

Besides, I completely disagree with the idea put forth that somehow nobody else is qualified to comment on -- or, more accurately, criticize since praising is also commenting on -- her conduct as a police officer appearing in court unless that person has had his hand shot. That is just silly thinking.
Click to expand...


what you have done is remove any context and imply that calling the suspect a name is somehow an egregious act.

unprofessional? sure, i can accept that. given the circumstances, i doubt many people actually have any problem with it. i certainly dont. she was testifying as the victim of a crime (attempted murder).

department in the gutter? that's stupid.

did you even read the article? probably not, at least not before your first post. if you had, you would have realized the op did not blank anything out.

did you get to the portion where she describes what went through her mind at the time?



(don't know why the "thumb up" is there.)
 
Last edited:
Gollnick -- not sure what exactly qualifies you as an expert in the proper etiquette of court testimony, but I would suggest you read the entire article before you get your shorts in any more of a bundle. Stating that the officer in question was simply "shot in the hand" is proof that you didn't read the article very closely (if at all). To quote the article, "His round ripped off most of her right ring finger and would have torn into her chest had it not been stopped by her U.S. Armor Level III vest." You seem much more bothered by the fact that she used an expletive in court than you are by the fact that she was shot. You need to get some perspective.
 
I'm not going to comment if I feel she was professional or not, that's not for me to judge.

One thing I do know, she conducted herself far better than I would have.

I was glad to read her and her partner are still with us.
 
Yes, I read the article since I wanted to know the whole context before I commented.

When a police officer appears in court as a police officer -- even if it is to give a victim's statement -- when he/she is introduced as "Officer so-and-so, an officer of the City of X Police Department," when he/she appears in uniform, that uniformed and identified police officer becomes a representative of his/her department and, indeed, community and also his/her profession. As such, his/her conduct -- including language and self-control/discipline -- will necessarily reflect back upon his/her department, community, and profession.
 
Just to give a little background.., I have two younger brothers in Law Enforcement and I'm am currently in the Sheriff's Academy. Although neither has been wounded on duty I do know a couple Officer's who have. So although I cannot empathize with this woman I do think I have more insight than some as to what she must be going through.

I personally don't disagree with Gollnick's statement that the Officer's comments in court were unprofessional., on the same token I'm extremely glad she said what she said. I think todays society has become a little too polite with it's verbage at times. This man tried to kill someone, regardless of whether or not it was an LEO being shot at, I think that pretty much fits the definition of a piece of s**t in my opinion. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, whats the harm in calling it a duck.....

Gollnick, I find it a bit disturbing that after reading the story the only thing you felt the need to comment on is the officer's court room etiquette, really?
 
Last edited:
Gollnick said:
Yes, I read the article since I wanted to know the whole context before I commented.

When a police officer appears in court as a police officer -- even if it is to give a victim's statement -- when he/she is introduced as "Officer so-and-so, an officer of the City of X Police Department," when he/she appears in uniform, that uniformed and identified police officer becomes a representative of his/her department and, indeed, community and also his/her profession. As such, his/her conduct -- including language and self-control/discipline -- will necessarily reflect back upon his/her department, community, and profession.
Click to expand...


no one can dispute that conduct in court reflect's on the department.

you say that she, the department, and the profession, are now in the gutter. that is a completely stupid statement.

within the context of the case, all she has done is express her emotions. victims are often allowed this opportunity, and that she is a police officer should make no difference in regards to being allowed to speak as a victim.
 
Being a regular citizen, I hope the victim impact statement carried no more weight just because of the victim being a LEO.
 
I'm with Gollnick on this one, the officer chose a job that requires a level of emotional detachment and objectivity. Sure she was shot and while unfortunate it certainly is a risk that comes with job (unfortunately, but clearly she knew that as she was wearing the vest) and I don't feel it is beyond her to keep professional bearing while in uniform or representing the PD, particularly with respect to the criminal prosecution of her assailant. I believe in the military they call it 'maintaining your military bearing' the same certainly applies to a police officer.

I don't want a police officer to be emotional when responding to a scene, I want them to only look at the facts and remove their emotions from the situation completely. Cooler heads prevail as the idiom goes.
 
Ethelred said:
I'm with Gollnick on this one, the officer chose a job that requires a level of emotional detachment and objectivity. Sure she was shot and while unfortunate it certainly is a risk that comes with job (unfortunately, but clearly she knew that as she was wearing the vest) and I don't feel it is beyond her to keep professional bearing while in uniform or representing the PD, particularly with respect to the criminal prosecution of her assailant. I believe in the military they call it 'maintaining your military bearing' the same certainly applies to a police officer.

I don't want a police officer to be emotional when responding to a scene, I want them to only look at the facts and remove their emotions from the situation completely. Cooler heads prevail as the idiom goes.
Click to expand...


that's not entirely accurate.

if you are the victim, you would expect the officer to exhibit some level of compassion as well.
 
MORIMOTOM said:
if you are the victim, you would expect the officer to exhibit some level of compassion as well.
Click to expand...

Not really, I go to my family for compassion not to a stranger...

Emotions are what cause people to make mistakes, and with respect to the law mistakes are something that simply can not be afforded.
 
Ethelred said:
Not really, I go to my family for compassion not to a stranger...

Emotions are what cause people to make mistakes, and with respect to the law mistakes are something that simply can not be afforded.
Click to expand...



mistakes happen for all sorts of reasons, emotion is not the only cause.


are you suggesting that when i am dealing with a victim who is crying, has no idea what to expect, is afraid, has just lost a friend or family member, and doesn't know what to do next, i should simply robotically attempt to take the facts like joe friday?

i didn't say the officer must actually care, no one can make someone care about a situation. either they do or don't.

but part of what i must do is express sympathy for their situation and proceed accordingly.
 
MORIMOTOM said:
i didn't say the officer must actually care, no one can make someone care about a situation. either they do or don't.

but part of what i must do is express sympathy for their situation and proceed accordingly.
Click to expand...

So you acknowledge that comforting someone isn't tied to emotions...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top