# Background information



## Lefty22 (Nov 18, 2008)

A couple years ago I was involved in a brawl during a college party. During the fight I was hit with a bottle and got staples in my head. About a week later I got a summons to appear in court on A&B with a dangerous weapon charge. Someone accused me of hitting them with a bottle (Did not happen) and brought me to court. To sum it up, I pleaded down to misd. A&B and received 6 months pre-trial probation, but was never convicted. The court said after the time was up the charge would be dismissed. One of my professors, a former Federal agent advised I get the record sealed, which I did. What would show up on a background investigation from a police department, and could this be an issue during the hiring process? Basically, would this prevent me from getting on the force? Thanks for your time guys.


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

I never met a Federal Agent that knew anything about police work.


----------



## JMB1977 (Nov 24, 2007)

LawMan3 said:


> If it comes up just don't lie about it - be 100% honest. In other words, if they ask you if you have ever been to court, tell them everything because they probably already know. Remember, integrity begins the second you even think about becoming a police officer, and you don't want to screw that up.


+1, Like Lawman said...if your want to be a police officer sealing your record will not hide anything because any good background investigator will find out the truth in the end. Always tell the truth.


----------



## Lefty22 (Nov 18, 2008)

So would it be something to disqualify me? Thanks guys.


----------



## redsox03 (Jan 6, 2007)

Lefty22 said:


> So would it be something to disqualify me? Thanks guys.


They could look at you as a liability. You might be better off going to another state that isn't so competitive. Just my opinion.


----------



## Albundy (May 31, 2007)

You stated that it did not happen, what does the police report say? Thats what could hurt you.


----------



## Foxy85 (Mar 29, 2006)

Didn't happen, yet you plead out.....Hmmmmmmm


----------



## Lefty22 (Nov 18, 2008)

Foxy, yes the court said if I did 6 months pre trial probation then it would be dismissed. I figured, with the financial situation of paying a lawyer thousands of dollars and going to trial, keeping my nose clean for 6 months seemed like the better option, especially when the charge was dismissed.


----------



## Foxy85 (Mar 29, 2006)

Here is some useful info.

Even though the D.A.'s tell you dismissed...doesn't mean it won't come up on your record...in fact it will. The second you're arrested or arraigned, you now have a record, and it will show up on the BOP.

So your record will read something like this:

A&B DW > Assualt and Battery .... C.W.O.F. (Dismissed)

Therefor, you can claim you have no record, however when they run you, it will show up, and you will still have to answer for it.

And F.Y.I, a CWOF means you admit to sufficient facts that they could find you guilty, but if you stay out of trouble for "X" amount of time, then they dismiss the charge....

Moreover, your CWOF is not as good as a straight dismissal, or a not guilty.

I love the people that sit in court and plead their innocense up and down, then take a D.A.'s deal.....Before speaking with the D.A. you'd think the Police were out to get everybody, then low and behold, Ok, I'll pay $500.oo in fines and agree to a CWOF.

Either you're innocent or not. Plain and simple.

They have court appointed attorney's btw. They are paid for by the state, and the defendant pays minimal fees for their representation.....not thousands of dollars.


----------



## Lefty22 (Nov 18, 2008)

Thanks for the info, but everyone knows court appointed lawyers don't do anything. To get anywhere you need a good lawyer. You are guilty until proven innocent and if you dont spend the money to get a good lawyer you are all done. Do you think someone like Mike Vick would have got his sentence if he had a court appointed lawyer?


----------



## JMB1977 (Nov 24, 2007)

Well put Foxy.


----------



## Edmizer1 (Aug 27, 2006)

If you want to be a cop and have a minor BOP record, NEVER get it sealed. As stated before, a good background investigator will at least get some of the story on their own, and it may not be the most favorable or accurate version. A guy from my academy got a "Public Drinking" charge when he was a teenager which he got sealed. His background investigator told him that he would be failing him on his background just on the basis of having sealed record. The reason was that although the offense could be minor, it could also be very serious. He had to get the record unsealed and there was no problem. Never listen to a federal agent when they give you advice on local law enforcement issues.


----------



## Foxy85 (Mar 29, 2006)

LawMan3 said:


> Quite the contary lefty. Think of it this way...a court appointed lawyer does this kind of stuff EVERYDAY, while you can find the best lawyer in the world from, say California, and when he or she comes up here, they have no idea who or what they're stepping into. Court appointed lawyers from the public defender's office know the judges, know the DAs, and know that court like the back of their hand - they can influence decisions in court. PLUS they are not as expensive as some high-profile lawyer. Hell, you could find the best lawyer in the world and they could have little to NO experience in cases such as the one you need a lawyer for, therefore you spend money out the ass and take a bigger chance at losing your case. So think about what you're saying before you take a shot at court appointed lawyers - or anyone for that matter.
> 
> ps: I'm not saying getting a private lawyer is a bad idea, but just weigh your options out.
> 
> ...


I once had a public defender sit a client down in the lobby, and i quote " So, I spoke to the D.A., and you're screwed."

While I did everything not to piss myself laughing with his brutal honesty, he was right. Public defedners as stated before, know the courts you're in, know the D.A., and know the judges. They have excellent rapoir with the courts. A private attorney will sugar coat things a bit more, because lets face it, without a client, he doesn't get paid. If you don't like what he has to say, you may mov eon to someone else.

A public defender gets paid either way....they offer you their best advice, whether you agree with it or not. They don't have to sugar coat things or tell you to go to trial to get your money.

I will say this...certain charges, I would acquire a private attorney. But If I ever got picked up on something silly like a disorderly, or disturbing the peace, or something ot that effect, you're just wasting your money on private attoreys.

Another side not of info. >>>> If you make too much money, you do not qualify for a public defender, and must get a private attorney or represent yourself...Hence Micheal Vick getting his own....


----------



## trueblue (Jan 21, 2008)

Lefty22 said:


> A couple years ago I was involved in a brawl during a college party. During the fight I was hit with a bottle and got staples in my head. About a week later I got a summons to appear in court on A&B with a dangerous weapon charge. Someone accused me of hitting them with a bottle (Did not happen) and brought me to court. To sum it up, I pleaded down to misd. A&B and received 6 months pre-trial probation, but was never convicted. The court said after the time was up the charge would be dismissed. One of my professors, a former Federal agent advised I get the record sealed, which I did. What would show up on a background investigation from a police department, and could this be an issue during the hiring process? Basically, would this prevent me from getting on the force? Thanks for your time guys.


Some things a background investigator will consider: 1- Were you honest about the incident? 2-Does the police report confirm your story? 3-Your age at the time of incident? (We have all done stupid things when we were young), 4-Your record and or police involvement up until the time you are being looked at by the PD investigating you; 5-Character references. Just my .02 worth


----------



## Foxy85 (Mar 29, 2006)

When it comes down to someone who has a CWOF and someone who doesn't, the PD will make the obvious choice, and there are plenty of people with clean BoP's. On that note there are plenty of stupid people with clean BoP's.......

As trueblue stated.....Be ready to answer for it, and be honest about it. Prsent yourself well, and that you've grown up since then...etc etc.


----------



## Guest (Nov 27, 2008)

LawMan3 said:


> Quite the contary lefty. Think of it this way...a court appointed lawyer does this kind of stuff EVERYDAY, while you can find the best lawyer in the world from, say California, and when he or she comes up here, they have no idea who or what they're stepping into. Court appointed lawyers from the public defender's office know the judges, know the DAs, and know that court like the back of their hand - they can influence decisions in court. PLUS they are not as expensive as some high-profile lawyer. Hell, you could find the best lawyer in the world and they could have little to NO experience in cases such as the one you need a lawyer for, therefore you spend money out the ass and take a bigger chance at losing your case. So think about what you're saying before you take a shot at court appointed lawyers - or anyone for that matter.


I have to disagree; public defenders are interested in disposing of the case, collecting their fees, and moving on to the next case. I have yet to see one actually interested in going to trial; they mostly get mad when a client insists upon it.

With some things in life, like apple juice or spring water, it doesn't matter if you buy generic. Other things, like men's suits and lawyers, you most definitely get what you pay for. You just need to make sure you're hiring the right kind; you don't want to hire a divorce attorney for an OUI trial, but an experienced (as in actually litigating cases) defense attorney is worth their weight in gold.


----------



## PatrolDB (Jul 23, 2008)

Delta784 said:


> I have to disagree; public defenders are interested in disposing of the case, collecting their fees, and moving on to the next case. I have yet to see one actually interested in going to trial; they mostly get mad when a client insists upon it.


I couldn't agree more... I'm actually suprised to see some people feel differently about them?

Anyway, I disagree with what a lot of people are saying here. I think it depends on the department you are applying to and I'd have to say you'd have more trouble with a non-civil service department as oppose to a civil service department.

My department has many guys with a bop and mostly related to college incidents. Most chiefs are somewhat human and look past a SEALED record and will decide for themselves how right someone is for the job. If all your other puzzle pieces are in place then I would think you'd be fine with a sealed record as long as you are completely honest about it.


----------



## HELPMe (Dec 17, 2004)

It will show up on your BOP when your history is run.


----------



## Lefty22 (Nov 18, 2008)

Thanks for all the input, I appreciate it.


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

Edmizer1 said:


> If you want to be a cop and have a minor BOP record, NEVER get it sealed. As stated before, a good background investigator will at least get some of the story on their own, and it may not be the most favorable or accurate version. A guy from my academy got a "Public Drinking" charge when he was a teenager which he got sealed. His background investigator told him that he would be failing him on his background just on the basis of having sealed record. The reason was that although the offense could be minor, it could also be very serious. He had to get the record unsealed and there was no problem. Never listen to a federal agent when they give you advice on local law enforcement issues.


Sealed record or not I have to disagree. Since the SJC ruled that the police chief can require you to get a license to carry versus carrying on your badge, things have changed. A background check shows a sealed record. A License to Carry check unseals that record.


----------



## usaf1199a (Nov 28, 2005)

Just to weigh it on this... prior to getting on I used to have a negative perception of public defenders but the majority are good litigators and good people. For the most part they do a good job. And PLUS with the way the Commonwealth disposes of cases they all have a pretty good track record!!


----------



## Guest (Dec 6, 2008)

usaf1199a said:


> Just to weigh it on this... prior to getting on I used to have a negative perception of public defenders but the majority are good litigators and good people.


Good people, yes. Good litigators, I have to disagree. I've seen some good ones, but litigation is like any skill; use it or lose it, and most public defenders don't get a lot of opportunities to practice because the majority of their cases never make to trial.


----------

