- Chinese Death Star: The moon cited as the perfect launch pad for ballistic missiles
- Help wanted: Homeland Security plagued by vacancies at the top
- We are not amused: Queen’s protection officers warned to keep ‘sticky fingers’ off the royal cashews
- Unleash the crossbows: Gov. Scott Walker creates new hunting season
- Bubonic plague kills 20 in Madagascar
- G-20 diplomats fell for hacker attack promising nude photos of former French first lady Carla Bruni
- Minnesota guardsman charged with stealing private soldier data for fake IDs
- Florida appeals court rules universities can’t regulate guns
- Vladimir Putin defends Russian conservative values
- Tea Party Patriots call key GOP firing a declaration of war
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Disclosing names discourages watchdogs
Question of the Day
I was disappointed to read the article published in The Washington Times regarding a termination case involving a member of the Metropolitan Police Department (“Fired D.C. cop questions Lanier’s impartiality,” Page 1, Friday).
As reported in the article, the termination case arose out of the terminated officer’s relationship with and disclosure of confidential information to a convicted drug dealer. While personnel rules prevent me from commenting on the specifics of the case or the various claims reportedly made by the union attorney on behalf of this officer, I am compelled to address two points.
First, the Metropolitan Police Department is serious about protecting the identity of any citizen who seeks to make anonymous complaints regarding crime. Citizens must be able to make such complaints without fear of retaliation so that they may continue to play a critical role in the department’s ongoing mission to prevent and solve crime. Any member of the department, at any rank, who fails to protect such a citizen’s identity will be held accountable. Publishing the identity of an anonymous complainant, as your newspaper did on Friday, undermines public safety efforts. Your decision to publish the complainant’s name exposed her to further potential harassment and physical retaliation while doing nothing to advance or otherwise support the story.
Second, all members of the department are expected to conduct themselves in a manner that aims to avoid bringing discredit upon themselves or the department, and to conduct their public and private lives in accordance with the high standards expected for those in the position. As both law enforcement officers and public servants, we are mindful that we are always in the public eye and that our conduct, both on and off duty, has consequences for our public safety efforts.
As recent events have demonstrated, the department will be unrelenting in rooting out and removing from its ranks those few individuals who betray the public’s trust and through their conduct tarnish the reputation of this department. Washington residents and the brave men and women of this department deserve no less.
Chief of Police
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
By Matt Kibbe
The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending
Get Breaking Alerts
- Obama's Afghanistan experts stumped on U.S. death toll, war costs during hearing
- Comma on!: Twitter erupts over Obama-Castro 'marriage'
- NAPOLITANO: A conspiracy so vast
- All-out war breaks out in GOP over budget pact
- White House faces press revolt over access to Obama's South Africa flight
- MALCOLM/REIMER: Over-criminalization undermines respect for legal system
- GOP Rep. Tim Murphy rolls out mental health legislation
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Selfie at heart of Obama fiasco to stay secret
- Biden guarantees victory on immigration reform