To the editor:
I spent my career in law enforcement, have seen rulings go against the police and you accept it as part of the job of bringing those offenders before the court to be tried.
It is the court’s job to find guilt or innocence and although we at times did not believe the decision was correct we continue to do our jobs in law enforcement.
But I find it somewhat concerning when a lawyer has to defend a decision allowing a motion to address why they are protecting the public from the police through a letter in the paper (Letters, the Times, Monday, June 3).
My point here: Not all the decisions of the court are correct as these rulings are sometimes overturned by higher courts who find the lower courts erred in their decisions.
If this is the case, why doesn’t the bar address the rulings given in error by judges who are not always correct and publish those in the paper as well.
I have never seen a lawyer do that, and I bet I never will hear an attorney say we need to protect the public from judges’ rulings to protect our 4th Amendment rights.
Retired Chief of Police