disciplining a police detective

rosehips said:

Hi everyone,
I need some help with the way disciplining a police detective works.

Here's the scenario:
A detective, in other to protect an undercover cop friend who committed a murder, tries to plant evidence on a vagrant.
She was not caught doing this, but when the vagrant gets exonerated, IA takes an interest and investigates her.
All of this is happening in the background of my novel, for the most part, so the details aren't very fleshed out. But I would like to know, what would be likely to happen to her if they suspected she did it but didn't have proof?
What kind of evidence would get her suspended, but not dismissed or arrested?

Thank you for any and all advice!

Click to expand...

Hi, Rose! This is my final post before a "self-ban" takes effect, but feel free to PM if you ever need additional info.

If she's under investigation, she might either be put on desk duty or admin leave (latter more likely if it's a solid case against detective in question). She could be busted down if they do find evidence against her, or fired if it's bad enough.

It sounds like they only suspect her and without evidence, they can't really take disciplinary action (she has her union reps after all). I predict they'd keep a very close eye on her--the key is if she told her partner about any of this, because her 'associates' would be interviewed as well but aren't likely to rat her out.

Evidence they'd need is the obvious forensic evidence: did she remove whatever she planted from the evidence vault? Can they trace it back to her? Did anyone see her do it? Did she confide in her partner? Again, RJK can give you more specifics as this relates to local/state PD v. federal.

Good luck!!

Falsifying a murder? Should do time, but you'd have to know how corrupt the particular precinct is, which varies drastically country to country.
You want them to take action with no evidence? That's quite corrupt, they would do something like that in Canada, openly or under the table, but hopefully not get away with it in the USA or other civilized places. )

Circumstantial evidence could get her put on desk duty or suspended pending a hearing. Depending on how powerful the chief is, vs the union, they may not be able to convict her without hard evidence.

I've seen officers walk into a hearing where the disposition was already filled out and signed by the chief before anyone spoke a word. He'd made up his mind the officer was guilty of whatever it was, based on the accusation, not the evidence. The hearing was a waste of time, and the officer and his rep said so, for the record.

RIFF said:

Falsifying a murder? Should do time, but you'd have to know how corrupt the particular precinct is, which varies drastically country to country.
You want them to take action with no evidence? That's quite corrupt, they would do something like that in Canada, openly or under the table, but hopefully not get away with it in the USA or other civilized places. )

Click to expand...

wtf? lol