Pittsburgh FOP Criticized For Comments

By Andy Sheehan

PITTSBURGH (KDKA) — The Fraternal Order of Police says the Jordan Miles incident has made officers more apprehensive – less willing to arrest those carrying illegal guns.

The union says the three officers involved have been found guilty in the court of public opinion.

“Look what happened to our three guys, they’re being prosecuted and they’ve never been to trial,” Chuck Hanlon of the FOP said. “In the court of public opinion, they’ve been nailed to the cross.”

The officers – Richard Ewing. Michael Saldutte and David Sisak – have been suspended pending the results a federal investigation, but the FOP says they’ve been left to twist in the wind by the city and that’s had a chilling effect on the rest of the force.

Last year, city police made 659 arrests for illegal gun possession, but through November of this year the number of arrests as fallen off sharply to 469.

At the same time, homicides in the city have climbed from 40 last year to 56 this year.

“You have 200 less guns taken off the street this year and it’s a direct cause of what happened to those three officers,” said Hanlon.

But Tuesday, City Councilman Ricky Burgess who represents the Homewood community said the Miles incident should not hamper police effectiveness.

“Certainly we want police to do what is necessary to seize guns across our city as I’ve said repeatedly; however, I also believe that there has to be a collaboration between the community and the police,” he said.

Vic Walczak of the American Civil Liberties Union criticized the police for what he sees as the stopping and frisking people in high-crime, low-income neighborhoods without probable cause.

“If the police are harassing people for no reason that doesn’t help them fight crime and get guns off the street,” he said.


One Comment

  1. richardw says:

    Sorry Mr. Hanlon but your 3 officers should be in jail for what they did to that kid. Since when is having something in your pocket constitute reasonable articulable suspicion to even stop someone let alone beat them half to death?

  2. Brad says:

    Sorry RichardW, having something in your pocket and not responding to an officer’s warning does by all means constitute “articulable suspicion”. While I am not condoning excessive force by any means, how blind are you that you blatanly ignore that the kid ran. If you have nothing to hide or worry about why run? Why? Please do not give me the excuse of “scared of crooked cops” lip service. Come up with something more substantial. I’ll help you, you can’t. Also, why was the boy carrying a bottle in his pocket? Were his hands broken? Who in their right mind thinks carrying a bottle in their pocket is a good idea? I could go on.. But I am curious as to richardw’s intellectual response before I tear him up again.

    1. BRAD"S AN IDIOT says:

      Brad your a Moron….. These cops beat a kid so bad they put him in the hospital. Then when they realized they beat an innocent person they charged him with resisting arrest. I’m sorry but walking from one place to another with anything in your pocket doesn’t give any officer the right to search you. These officers weren’t in uniform. Now if I am in a bad neighborhood an 3 people not in uniform are yelling at me and start chasing me and I know I didn’t do anything wrong my ass is running…

      1. Brad says:

        Once again I will repeat I do not condone excessive force. It’s amazing how your facts have been skewed over the last year. The boy did, in fact, have something in his pocket. Also, at what point did he realize they were officers? Let’s take the time and think about this. I will grant you the fact he nay not have known immediately they were officers. Hence his immediate reaction to flee. Understood. Dont you think those men at some point during the chase identified themselves? Who else could it possibly be other than police officers. 3 white guys in the middle of the night in a low income neighborhood shouting they are cops. I highly doubt it was batman, robin and superman. The boy knew exactly after a few seconds who he was running from. Also these men are known in the neighborhood, why would they risk future arrests by assaulting this boy if he didn’t resist or fight? Short answer, they wouldn’t. Also anyone who doesn’t actually have a valid point name calls.. Because they have nothing intelligent to say..

  3. Barry says:

    They’re all crooked idiots that think they can do what ever they want,and they get away with it. THATS THE LAW!!!!!!

  4. barney says:

    They are just crooks with badges

  5. richardw says:

    Brad, you are 100% wrong and I believe that you know it. There is no stop and frisk statute in Pennsylvania law. The only way those cops could stop and search that kid is if they had reasonable articulable suspicion that a crime was or was about to be committed and then they could do a terry stop. Having something in your pocket does not constitute RAS. If you can then by all means, show me case law that it does. Using your own words, I’ll help you, you can’t. Not responding to an officers warning does not satisfy RAS either, again show me case law. According to your logic an officer can stop me for just about any reason and when I will not respond to him, which I would not as I would invoke my 5th amendment rights, he could search me. I have news for you, anything that came out of that illegal search would be thrown out of court and you know it. It’s happening in Philly right now, here’s a link so you can see what happens when you perform illegal searches. http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20101219_Gun_cases_tossed_out__suspects_walk_out.html
    I’m also not sure why you think it’s so criminal to carry a bottle of soda in your pocket, what about my wallet, is that ok to carry in my pocket? How about my car keys, is that ok? Now, one more time in case you didn’t understand it the first time, show me case law that says having something in your pocket constitutes RAS before you “tear me up” again, lol. I think you have a lot of learning to do about the constitution of this country before you can engage me in a battle of intelligence as your short on ammunition.

    1. Brad says:

      So you bring references involving a case that has no bearing on our boy. You are blatantly ignoring the simple facts in this case and making invalid points. Let’s review again and I will put this as plain as possible. The boy was out after hours. He could have had .15 cents in his pocket, doesn’t matter. If the boy complies and the officers pat him down, rough him up etc.. It’s wrong. Agreed ? Good. Here is the point you are completely ignoring. The boy ran, not only did he run he fought with them. Ask your self why. Put the kid on a lie detector and ask why. Because he had something to hide. Who runs from 3 cops and fights with them if they are clean.. I wouldn’t, why? Because I am law abiding. Him running cannot be ignored. Does it give the right to the officers to assume him? No. But I am quite sure you know he wouldnt run if he was innocent. Did the officers have good bedside manners? No, that isn’t a crime. What you are trying to tell me is, this kid is 100% telling the truth to the media and everyone and, those 3 officers who, as far as I know, are law abiding citizens as well are lying. How can you be sure? All you know is the kid was assaulted, but to what extent? Sure we saw those pictures on the news, but answer my question. Is it out of the rhealm of possibility this kid is lying to hide the fact he had a gun or drugs ( the latter more likely). If, in fact he had a gun and he did fight with the cops then he should be lumped up a bit. So before you call for these officers heads, I suggest you wait til the facts come out and not take the word of the media, who we both know is unreliable, and some kid who’s story has changed ( he originally said he didn’t run).

  6. richardw says:

    You don’t seem to get it. The officers had no reason to stop him in the first place, therefore the incident should have never happened. This is not communist China, police officers need a reason to detain someone and seeing something is someones pocket is not a valid reason. I didn’t post the link to show anything about Miles, I posted it so that you could see what happens when police officers act on hunches without having reasonable articulable suspicion that a crime was or is about to be committed. All of the evidence is fruit of the poisonous tree and will be thrown out. It is a waste of the officers time and the taxpayers dollars not to mention a violation of the defendants civil rights. If they would have seen the kid make a dope deal or something then I would be fine with the stop but they didn’t, they saw a bottle in his pocket and I still see no way to justify the beating. There is no way on earth that 3 officers had to beat a 150lb. kid that badly to subdue him.

    As for him running, who knows, if I was a young black kid and three big white guys jumped out of a car yelling while I was just walking down the street minding my own business I might run also. Anyone can say that they’re a cop, look at how many home invasions start when someone kicks down the door and yells “Police”.

    1. Brad says:

      Merk beat me to it.. The dude wasn’t walking up a side walk, he came from inbeteeen houses.. Um ya that’s suspicion, running… Suspicion.. I will repeat myself again, if the kid did nothing and didn’t run the officers were wrong, if the kid ran and didn’t fight back the officers were wrong and beating him badly. Its blatanly obvious the kid was hiding something. Also it makes no difference the kid was 150 lbs, when I was 165 I was bustin heads in my younger days, it’s not the size of the dog in the fight it’s the size of the fight in the dog. I worked in places where restraints were needed for kids smaller that him and it took 3 or 4 HUGE men to hold them down.. If that kid layer one finger on an officer after he ran from between houses, he was wrong and needed to be taught a lesson.. What I hope for is people on all sides of the fence here to realize of you have nothing to hide don’t run. 95% of officers you encounter are fantastic citizens. I don’t know these gentleman personally but I’m willing to bet they are in tha majority. Don’t .. Don’t judge these three men because of your skewed views on police. If these three men are in fact guilty it will come out. But let them come out before you call for their heads. If the boy was acting suspicious, came out between some houses and didn’t respond to directives, he by all means deserved to be searched Annie questioned.. He could have used his 5th amendment and not said a word. Then if these gentlemen hurt him, yes, get rid of them. But that is not what happened and you know this. Your weak argument is the only leg you are trying to stand on. That the cops had no right to search.. Come to think of it, if that’s all the boy did was stand there we wouldn’t be having this conversation..

  7. merk says:

    Hey riichard? Did you read the report. in between two houses? Does that fit your RAS? Loitering and Prowling at Night. Know the law before running off at the mouth. What part of town are you from? Fox Chapel, Upper St clair? Next time you are in the burgh and need hellp from the police tell them your thoughts and see where that gets you. They are three great cops doing a job you would never have the guts to do. Bring your wife and kids to first night in town. Oh yeah not after light up night.

  8. richardw says:

    Not sure why you guys think walking between houses is a crime. So now if I walk out of my back door in the dark and around to the front the police have justification to detain me? I don’t know what country you two are living in but it sure isn’t the United States. It’s also funny how you consider the 4th amendment to the Constitution a “weak argument”.

    Young black kid is walks out of his house when 3 large white guys jump out yelling at him, what would you do? Sorry but walking through a yard at night is not a legal reason to stop anyone and if you can’t get that through your heads then this conversation is pointless. I’m on the kids side on this one because no matter how you frame it there was no reason for an encounter in the first place let alone what happened afterward.

    All of this abuse of power by the police has been way out of hand for years and is not going to get better until they are held accountable for their actions and that is not going to happen when they are policing themselves. The entire qualified immunity law needs to go away so that leo’s can be held responsible for what they do without being investigated by their brothers in blue. The city should not have to pay this kid, the officers responsible should.

    Do you really want to live in a society where the police can stop and search you for any reason they come up with? I don’t.

    1. Jeff says:

      Richardw you are a freaking complete moron. First of all this was not a case of someone waking out of his house and being confronted by police. If you’re going to comment on a situation at least get the CORRECT facts before you decide to weigh in. Where did you get your facts, the NAACP? the Miles family? Obviously whereever you got them they are biased. I might also say if you are going to present yourself as a great legal mind then how about going to a law library and reading the entire case before you cite a precedent. The case you cite is not on point. And if you’d like I could direct you to numerous cases which determined that it is illegal to resist even an illegal arrest, which this was not!!! I know you apparently think you’re Perry Mason or something but please. This case was investigated by the FBI and after a very thorough investigation, which included the testimony of Jordan Miles himself where he admitted he heard the officers identify themselves and knew they were officers but continued to fight them because he didn’t agree with being stopped. The FBI and the US attorney assigned to the case, after taking into consideration all the facts and the pertinent case law, came to the conclusion that these officers acted appropriately. This incident occurred solely due to Miles’ actions. He is solely to blame for the outcome. The police do not get paid to lose a fight. It is completely justifiable to stop someone who is lurking between houses at night time to determine their legal right to be there. Plus I might add as a homeowner I would expect the police to stop me and ask of I am in fact the homeowner if they see me walking around my house at night.

  9. richardw says:

    Wow, the FBI said they could not get a conviction because it was 3 against 1 so you think they are innocent, who’s the moron? Not to mention 1 government entity investigating another, what do you think the outcome would be? This is exactly why these cases need to be heard in trial by jury. Please show me where Miles admitted he fought with them because he didn’t agree with being stopped or where the FBI and US attorney said that the officers acted appropriately. If these officers were so innocent then why wouldn’t they take the FBI polygraph like Miles did instead of having a private party administer it?

    I will repeat myself again since you appear to be an imbecile that can’t read, I never posted any case that had anything to do with the Miles case. What I posted is what happens when cops act on hunches instead of legal precedent. If you believe that the police need to stop and question you if you are in your yard after dark then I feel sorry for you. I believe in freedom and want to be left alone. If I ever need the police then I will call 911, hasn’t happened yet and probably never will.

    BTW, where exactly did I state that it is legal to resist even an illegal arrest? If Miles was guilty of anything then why were any and all charges against him dropped? We’ll see what happens during the civil trial when you morons that support this type of behavior are forced to pay out another million or two due to police misconduct.

    1. joe smuckatelly says:

      richardw you won that arguement hands down
      pittsburgh west virginia in disquise.

  10. XPgher says:

    In this case a picture is worth a 1000 words. If the police abuse people regardless of race the way he was beaten then they obviously should be put in jail. Police are not above the law. They are supposed to serve the people … all the people.

    I’m guessing that once these cops realized who they beat up (an honors student with no criminal record leaving his mom’s house to go to his grandma’s place) … they had to start lying to cover their butts as his beating wounds certainly weren’t going to disappear in an hour or so.

    Its amazing the lies that were piled on in an attempt to cover their butts, “we thought he had a gun but it was a soda bottle … which we never found” “his neighbor called about a prowler … which she testified was not true”.

    In this case there obviously was excessive force used. I suspect the civil suite will go his way as it should and hopefully send a strong message to Pittsburgh police and city that no injustice should go unpunished.

    The FOP could have handled this a lot better too … they keep complaining that racial relationships are strained by this but meanwhile they never ever acknowledge that the boy was beaten pretty badly and they actually marched in a St Paddy’s day parade to support the 3 officers wearing tee shirts in commemoration of them. Talk about polarizing a situation!

    Its hard to imagine that even a tough criminal being beaten this way would be viewed as justifiable force. This case is just so bad. Makes you glad you don’t live in Pittsburgh anymore.

Comments are closed.

More From CBS Pittsburgh

Play It
Get The All New CBS Local App

Watch & Listen LIVE