Texas Police News.jpg



3-Day Suspension Reduced to Written Reprimand
More Today's News:
ߦ   FWPD suspects their strategies will tackle turnover
ߦ   Harris County DA’s Office Has Diverted Thousands of Youths From Criminal System
ߦ   Jury Convicts Priest of Sex Trafficking Three Victims
ߦ   Mental Health Jail Diversion Center expands eligibility
ߦ   Murder Conviction Brings 50 Year Sentence
ߦ   Officer Involved Shooting
ߦ   One dead as tornado hits south Texas town near the Gulf coast
ߦ   Restaurant employee fatally shot by 12-year-old in Keene, authorities say
ߦ   Teen uses slingshot to save sister from alleged kidnapper: Police
ߦ   Texas AG Challenges the New Border Policy to Protect Public Safety
ߦ   What is National Police Week?
ߦ   Aggravated Assault Arrest
ߦ   Animal rights group files federal complaint over guinea pig death
ߦ   Death Notice - Retired PO Michael E. Williams - Retired 1992
ߦ   Death Notice - Retired SPO Fred R. Mullins - Retired 2006
ߦ   Foreign National Extradited to the United States for Kidnapping and Assaulting U.S. Army Soldiers in Colombia
ߦ   Judge disqualified from Santa Fe shooting case
ߦ   Paxton Issues Statement on Catastrophic Illegal Immigration Surge Orchestrated by Biden Administration as Title 42 is Set to Expire
ߦ   Police News Links
ߦ   Repeat Sex Offender Sentenced to 20 Years in Prison for Two Attacks

Search Archives:

In December 13, 2022, HPOU General Counsel Aaron Suder represented a Central Patrol Sergeant in his arbitration appeal of a 3-Day Suspension, which was issued on May 23, 2022, by Chief Troy Finner.  The Sergeant was alleged to have violated General Order 200-41, Department Presence on Social Media and the Internet.  The City was represented at the arbitration by HPD attorneys Rhonda Reece and Kyle McCauley.  The case was heard by Independent Hearing Examiner Sherry Wetsch.

In December of 2021, the Sergeant made a post to his personal Twitter account that was meant to be a light-hearted joke about being woken up by the HPD (“Fox”) helicopter performing a routine training flight near his residence.  The post contained a screen shot that depicted the helicopter’s flight path, near the Sergeant’s residence, along with a caption that humorously suggested that the helicopter might consider flying at a higher altitude.  The Sergeant had obtained the screen shot from a publicly available internet website (one of dozens) that publishes aircraft flightpaths using aircraft transponder data.


Following the post, an IAD complaint was filed against the Sergeant by an HPD civilian employee who suggested that the post might present a danger to HPD helicopters and personnel, by advertising to would-be bad guys that there is a way to track the flight paths of HPD helicopters online.  The complaint also alleged that the sergeant had been warned before about making such posts by an HPD Commander.  Following the IAD investigation, the Department suspended the sergeant and argued at the arbitration that it was a poor exercise of judgment to post something to social media that depicts the location of HPD personnel performing official duties.


At the arbitration, the Union presented evidence and testimony that the Twitter post was meant to be nothing more than a light-hearted joke, and that the screen shot of the helicopter’s flight path was something that anyone with internet service would be able to see on any one of dozens of publicly available websites that publish such information.  In fact, flight path information obtained through aircraft transponder data is something that is permitted by the Federal government because it actually increases aviation safety, rather than decreases it.  Further, the Union argued, the information did not present a threat to HPD personnel by merely posting the location of officers performing their official duties, as HPD itself routinely publishes such information on its very own Twitter account.


Finally, the Union argued, this particular interpretation and application of the Department’s Social Media policy was overly broad, the policy itself is unequally applied among Departmental employees, and the issuance of a 3-Day Suspension in this case was unfair and inconsistent with the principles of a progressive disciplinary system, especially considering the Sergeant’s work history.




Following the appeal hearing, the arbitrator agreed with the Union’s position and issued an award on December 24, 2022, reducing the 3-Day Suspension to a Written Reprimand.

Post a comment
Email Address: (must be a valid address)
(will not be published or shared)
Comments: (plain text only)
Printer Friendly Format  Printer Friendly Format    Send to a Friend  Send to a Friend    RSS Feed  RSS Feed
© 1999-2023 The Police News. All rights reserved.