Break the rules, then retire to avoid the consequences?

Here’s a story from Las Vegas.

Briefly, a Las Vegas police captain arranged a private ride in a police helicopter for DJ Ashba (Guns N’ Roses guitarist) and his girlfriend. This became known and was investigated. The captain has retired to avoid being demoted (which would have meant a significant loss of retirement pay).

Is it normal that misbehavior in a police officer is not punishable if that officer has retired?

I’ve seen it happen with local politicians. It’s sort of an informal plea bargain in that the person steps down to save everyone the trouble of prosecuting them. The govt can say, “Look, we got rid of the guy.” The person can keep their retirement bennies. Granted, the bennies usually aren’t as great as they’d have gotten if they got to stay on. But they’re a lot better than the reductions that come with being fired outright.

I don’t know what you mean by normal. Most likely there were no criminal charges just departmental. Leave quietly without any fight and you go out at your current rank. Stay and fight t and it can be costly and messy for both sides. That can happen in any profession, especially when there are employment contracts involved.

The stranger part of the story is that they gave a free ride to a Guns and Roses guitar player and it wasn’t Slash. I never even heard of this guy.

Very normal, including the Military. Take what you have and get instead of staying and possibly losing it all.

If it worked there like it does around here, he would promptly get a job as a security consultant for Las Vegas, earning his old salary while still collecting a pension.

I like that! How about on the last day of our work, we break a rule, then retire to avoid the punishment!!! :smiley:

In the past the cops here could short circuit disciplinary proceedings by resigning. I think this is no longer possible.
You can also be ‘Required to Resign’ in some circumstances, which means you get to keep your benefits and pension rather risk losing it all if it goes against you.

Keep in mind we’re talking internal disciplinary charges not criminal violations. In most cases, losing your job would be a punishment for these charges. If somebody is willing to retire, what’s the point on continuing a hearing to decide if you’re going to fire them? It would be like trying to impeach Nixon after he resigned.

In cases where the act was really wrong and the department wants to make an issue out of it, they do have the option of conducting disciplinary actions against a retired or resigned employee. In addition to symbolic reasons, they may want to go after his pension or seek a fine or they may want to establish that he was found guilty of charges in order to prevent him from ever taking another government job.

The retirement was the punishment.

Back in the 80’s a State Treasurer of Pennsylvania was convicted of taking a bribe. His contract said that if he resigned or died before the sentencing portion of the trial his family would still get his pension benefits.

Budd Dwyer took a very public method of demonstrating that one of these two conditions was going to be met.

And suddenly I have a song stuck in my head that I haven’t heard since high school…what a good shot man.