Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

-Lurid Crime Tales-

Detroit 911 Operators Are Arraigned

2006-06-09

DETROITTwo 911 operators who authorities say did not believe a 5-year-old boy who called to say his mother had collapsed were arraigned Friday on willful neglect of duty charges.

Judge Jimmylee Gray entered not guilty pleas for Sharon Nichols 43, and Terri Sutton, 47. If convicted of the misdemeanor, they could get a year in jail. The women declined to comment afterward, but their lawyers said the operators intend to fight the charges. "We look forward to coming to court and defending this case in the proper forum," said Sutton's lawyer, David Lee.

Translation: they're stone cold guilty, but he's getting paid.

No police car was sent after Nichols took the first call on Feb. 20. The boy then called again three hours later, and Sutton sent police out to discipline the child and inform the parent that the youngster was dialing 911, prosecutors said. When police finally arrived, 46-year-old Sherrill Turner was dead.

Disciplinary action against the operators was pending and could range from suspension without pay to dismissal, police said.

You'd think this would be easy, wouldn't you.

Posted by:mcsegeek1

#5 Could've been Philly's 911...

Posted by: Pappy 2006-06-09 23:54

#4 ManSlaughter would be a charge I could understand for this non-performance of a job.

Posted by: 3dc 2006-06-09 23:38

#3 As a former 911 operator, you learn quickly which kids are playing around (laughing, refusing to get an adult on the line) and which ones are in some kind of trouble even if they can't articulate what the problem is (they are frightened, are indicating something bad is happening to mommy/daddy/whoever else is around, are crying, etc.)

The first operator should be facing some kind of felony charge, not just a willful neglect one. No way will I ever believe that blowing off a call like she did could possibly be standard operating procedure in any professional law enforcement agency. The second operator did the absolute minimum that would be required, but still had a major lack of judgment if she couldn't tell the difference between a kid playing on the phone and a kid trying to get help.

I only hope these two aren't still taking calls while the department decides what action they will take. Suspension without pay isn't strong enough in this case.

Posted by: Desert Blondie 2006-06-09 17:37

#2 No, I think the union starts taking every call seriously.

Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-06-09 16:44

#1 "We look forward to coming to court and defending this case in the proper forum," said Sutton's lawyer, David Lee.

Wanna guess the first thing Mr. Lee tries to do is to get the 911 tapes thrown out on a technicality?

Posted by: Thirt Angish6387 2006-06-09 15:50

00:00