Former deputy sentenced for cocaine possession

Well, that was my point that the law doesn't treat law enforcement officers the same way as it does for ordinary citizens for crimes petty or otherwise. Sheriff Gary Waters is another one. Dec. 2004. Pulled over for DUI in Dec. 2004. Arrested SIX WEEKS LATER for that offense. Anyone else would have been taken to the can immediately. Portsmouth Sheriff Deputy David Thomas.. DUI.. 30 days suspended, $500 fine with $200 suspended, license suspended for a year, but can apply for restricted license.
Maybe I am out of touch. I don't know.

that's a whole new subject. The particular case in Portsmouth was horrible and to the extreme and out of the norm b/c he used his position of power to flood the streets of Ptown with drugs (and his job was to prevent it)...I get your frustration over that (I was as well). Police Officers and shootings, I won't touch b/c I think that is a valid discussion as well.

I thought we were just talking about this one case. In this case there is no preferential treatment (and I'm not saying that is true across the board by any means...I know it is not and as an ordinary citizen it frustrates me as well).

Overall, I get tired of there being an article about someone committing a petit felony and the blogs start going wild about how this person should be in prison and our system has failed us, etc, etc. A. people don't realize how much a felony ruins your life (that alone is punishment) for a first offender. B. I don't want to pay for some non violent offender to sit in jail or worse prison so I can feel better about myself because I don't commit crimes. Gas costs too much money.

There still seems to be a different set of rules for police officers and the ordinary citizens when it comes to crimes, petty or otherwise. Take Muhammad Abdul-Ali convicted of drug conspiracy. Sentenced to 10 years, with 5 and 6 months suspended. Then it was reduced again to three years. He still got to keep his retirement while in jail.
I would also point out as well that if a police officer (on duty or not)fires his weapon in self defense (which he has every right to do so) if attacked by a person with a knife or other anything where the officer perceived a threat to his life, his actions are justified. Take the same scenario and replace police officer with John Q. Public and Mr. Public goes to jail and has to be interrogated, while the officer is given the benefit of the doubt. An ordinary citizen is not allowed to be afraid for his life in the same way a police officer is. Double standard and different rules sir.

poss. of cocaine is a class 5 felony so they could get up to 10 years. Just don't want to be accused of putting out false info or opinions.

people who get jail time for this class 6 felony (the least proscribed felony) do so because they have prior criminal records. We have sentencing guidelines in place which gives a range the judge should impose if a person is found guilty. This based only on their prior criminal record. So if you (I presume you don't have any record given your comments) or I were arrested for this we would receive the same exact punishment (probation and a felony on our record). However, if the "ordinary citizen" with prior offenses on their record was convicted of this offense their sentencing guidelines could be 1 day to 3 months, or 3 months to 6 months, OR if they are a serious offender jail and or prison time for more months or years (up to 5). Judges are not required to follow the guidelines but they do so about 85 percent of the time. This is because they have to STATE why they went either BELOW or ABOVE the guidelines in their disposition (and they as all of us are accountable for their decisions).

Well this guy is a "former" law enforcement officer. Isn't he supposed to held to higher standards? It also appears that persons convicted of similar offenses are often given a more rigid punishment (usually some jail time) than police officers caught in similar circumstances. DUI by law enforcement has also come to mind as well. Anyway, I stand by my original comment. Double standard clear and simple.

He got first offender status which is allowed under the law. Everyone who is convicted of a first felony or misdemeanor drug offense is ELIGIBLE to attempt keep it off their record. Of course this is not extended to the defendant who has 3 robberies on his record or 20 misdemeanors. It is for those who have lived a criminal free life and gives them the chance to not ruin their life with a FELONY (lose job, etc) and show their merit to the court that they can stay off drugs. If you are on uniform good behavior for 2 years, complete community service, comply w/ drug tests, do community service, and maintain contact with your probation officer, you have a chance to get the offense dismissed 2 years later. Many people fail at this and then there is probation violation hearing where they are exposed to the sentence hanging over there head (usually 5 years). However, when one succeeds they have truly proven they deserved the shot to keep the felony off their record. That's what happened in this case. I was in the courtroom (and no I don't know this guy...just giving you the facts).

Ditto to Keith's comment.

Why isn't he in jail like a regular citizen would be? Sure looks like a double standard to me.