Friday, Oct. 10, 2003 | 9:16 a.m.
A Metro Police officer was arrested Sept. 28 and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol. It's unfortunate any time a police officer is charged with this offense. They are in a position to know, firsthand, the horrible consequences that drunken driving can bring about. They are also trusted by society to obey the laws they are paid to enforce.
This particular arrest, however, was especially noteworthy -- the officer had also been arrested in April 2002 for DUI. Although that arrest did not result in a formal charge, he was suspended from the police force for two weeks, a punishment that was cut in half after he completed an alcohol counseling program. Additionally, the officer had been arrested this past May for DUI. For that offense, in which a field sobriety test revealed his blood-alcohol level to be 0.18, he was ordered to stand trial (scheduled for later this month). On top of all this, the officer failed to notify his superiors at Metro after having had his driver's license revoked on July 30. When they discovered the revocation, the officer was handed a three-week suspension. He is now on paid leave, awaiting the results of an internal investigation into his latest arrest.
We support Metro's action after the April 2002 arrest. Metro's superiors decided to help the officer rather than firing him on the spot. Most employers have programs for their people who develop alcohol or drug problems. This is good for individuals as well as the community -- the person gets a chance to salvage his career and the community benefits from his counseling, which more often than not succeeds in preventing future dangerous behavior. But we suggest Metro re-evaluate its policy regarding a second arrest so soon after the first. In this officer's case, his second arrest came just 13 months after his first. In our view, such disregard for a second chance at a career, and such disregard for public safety, are grounds for dismissal.
archive
