'Unfit' Stay on Chicago Police Hire List

It would appear that words are inadequate to describe the findings of the HRB in most of these cases.

In the event these candidates backed by the alderman commit a crime while on the job, will these same alderman go to city hall and complain about the inadequacies of the police? Some of these accusations/allegations are more than a simple mistake- murder, impeding an investigation, drug dealing.

Most of those reasons wouldnt stand up to a lawsuit. If you think you can reject applicants for minor crimes and failing polygraphs you're living in a dreamworld. Ask any qualified lawyer.

Well Joe, if you can't reject someone for failing a polygraph, why are those people trying to get hired with CPD instead of having jobs at the agencies that rejected them? Just a thought....

All in the name of diversity.

In respect to the article, I feel some applicants are blackballed. Don't get me wrong, I don't want someone thug tainting our reputation, but I feel if a person merely had a minor brush with the law, he or she deserves an opportunity to prove themselves. Of course, put them through a vigirous background check to see if they turly turned their life around. As far as the drug usage, if they only dappled and are not current drug users that should be weighed to into the equation as well. No one is perfect, but we all can learn from our mistakes!

Applicants are just that, applicants. They don't have any "appeal" rights. In fact the article quotes the board saying "there is no legal requirement" to afford them an appeal process. How can someone who has not even been hired yet have the right to appeal? This is absolutely ridiculous and the CPD needs to put an end to this absurd process. The perfect example of a bureaucratic government process at work.

We have all seen this type crap go on for years. And the worst part of it is that the very people who get 'blackballed' are usually the ones who are most practically qualified to save the city's ass when it comes to crunch time. And windup doing so after everyone else has said 'I give up'. Cops never give up, EVER.

How many times have 'questionable' applicant's come on to the job, with a stigma attached, and, when a really tough case comes along, one that requires these same 'questionable applicant's' background to solve, wind up being the last ones brought in simply because of this stigma bullsXXt ? (I call it as I see it folks!!)

For those folks either in or have prior service in the military, a simple question; How many times have you had an enlisted, considered a 'problem child' due to 'poor attitude' wind up solving a problem that saves both yours and the unit's neck when the time comes. And then goes on to 'smoke' every tough course that is put in front of them (usually done as a disciplinary measure by a short sighted or vindictive commander) ? Far too many times these same unit commanders decide that poor attitude deserves either an Art. 15 or a Chap 13 simply to get rid of someone who makes them look bad. But the really embarassing part is that these same people, when sent to another unit, windup excelling at any job put in front of them when they are provided with decent and responsible leadership, not the 'vulture of death on the shoulder' type micro-management that destroys morale and initiative. (PS; this type of leadership and management is seen in Dept's everywwhere. Is yours one of them ? If so, think about the consequences !!!) Can we say retention ?

Same for Police and Sheriff's Dept's. How many times have you had a officer, who is considered not a team player, take a case that no one thinks can be solved and instead not only breaks the case open and get a conviction (are there any ADA's out there reading this ?) but shows that ability and performance are not a requirement of 'team player' ability. A team is suppossed to accomplish something, not be a clique for beer chugging or hooker/groupie chasing after shift.

Are there folks who have no right to wear the badge. No doubt !! Convicted felons are right up there at the top of the list. But if you are caught up in a raid or something equally minor and just plain dumb (are any of use ever not guilty of this one ?) and charged, simply by virtue of being there and not by you doing anything, then yes there needs to be an avenue of appeal. It is the height of arrogance (and discrimination of any type is a real fast rationalization behind it) to say that a by virtue of association you are not considered 'good enough'.

I sincerely hope Supt Weiss has the wisdom and vision to realize that it's not just looking good to a hiring board that makes good cops. It's motivation, compassion, discretion and ability that are what's needed on the street, not just a good looking personnel jacket. Looking good is for Honor Guards and statues. Neither one that I've seen, in 28 years, was ever good for anything except holding the doors open.

I'm in the Military, and it has been my childhood dream to become a Police Officer. I got a theft charge when I was 15. I joined the Military when I was 17, to turn my life around, and I've been in for 9 years now. I've done 2 deployments to Iraq already. I don't want to be denied employment, because of my past. Everyone deserves a second chance in life. Some issues are just to serious to be considered, and I understand that, but no one is perfect. You show me a perfect person, and I'll show you Jesus.

JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS DISQUALIFIED FROM ANOTHER DEPARTMENT OR WAS NOT HIRED BY ANOTHER DEPARTMENT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED FROM ALL DEPARTMENTS. I WAS NOT HIRED BY FOUR SEPARATE DEPARTMENTS BUT WAS HIRED BY A FEDERAL AGENCY. I'M GLAD THAT I WAS NOT HIRED ON THE CITY LEVEL BECAUSE I NOW HAVE A MUCH BETTER CAREER WITH BETTER PAY.