My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-06-18 Police Commission Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Police Department
>
Police Commission
>
Minutes
>
2001 - 2009
>
2004
>
2004-06-18 Police Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/29/2011 8:17:30 AM
Creation date
6/16/2011 11:54:08 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Hawaii County Police Commissioner <br />Regular Session Minutes <br />June 18, 2004 <br />Page 13 <br />BERTSCH: Yes, because there's no accountability. I think that you can get rid of b) <br />and c) and leave a) because basically b) and c) is reiterating what a) is asking you to <br />do, right? Unconflicted loyalty is unconflicted loyalty to the interest of the community. <br />DE SILVA: This is true except that it points out particular problems that occur so often, <br />I thought that they should be mentioned, and this came from some other state thing. <br />because conflicting loyalty such as to advocacy or interests groups and membership in <br />other commissions or staff. In other words, that reminds people if you're doing these <br />other things, it shouldn't conflict with your loyalty to the police commission. <br />BERTSCH: Maybe a way to handle that, Paul, is that under i) where you have gotten <br />into subparagraphs, familiar relationships, witnessing events, being a party to the <br />complaint, maybe b) and c) ought to be subtopics of a) as more of reference because <br />that would make sense. <br />HARA: So, b) and c) would then be sub i. and ii. <br />DE SILVA: No, I would like to speak against that because if you're looking at i., i. is <br />talking about- <br />BERTSCH: No, you have examples. You see under i., it says examples of personal <br />bias, and then you go to the next page, top of 5, how you've listed them. Wouldn't b) <br />and c) be examples of a)? <br />DE SILVA: That's a different matter that you're talking about because in i., you're <br />talking about disqualification in the outcome of the complaint. So, you're not <br />disqualified in the outcome of the complaint if you have conflicting loyalty to the <br />community necessarily. We're talking about two different ethical- <br />BERTSCH: No, no, what I'm recommending is that a) would still stand but b) and c) <br />would be sub headings of a). <br />DE SILVA: I thought you said i. <br />BERTSCH: No, no, I'm saying the format. <br />DE SILVA: Okay. <br />BERTSCH: I'm saying the format. I'm saying follow the format as exemplified in i. <br />That would clarify it. <br />DE SILVA: You want to make that motion? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.