Wow, this person must have a personal vendetta against the Mr. Weaver and Mr. Morris. Especially considering that Ed Morris hasn't worked for the district in 2 years and is now a police chief for a metro city....

If Morris is now a police chief then I feel very sorry for the residents. This man is a hot-headed fraud that will manufacture and/or omit evidence on a whim. I only hope the district attorney monitors this sight and delves into any case tied to Morris, before we find that he has put innocent people in jail or state prison system.

He is an absolute disgrace to the badge and does not belong in the profession.

Is his position appointed or elected, because I have the information to bring him down. I think the feds should keep a very close eye on him and any testimony coming from his mouth can never be taken as anything near the truth.

There is one thing that I hate and that is a dirty cop and this man leaps to the top of the heap.

[Ed Note: First, police offices don't put people in jail or prison--the D.A. does. That being said, there is a question of how appropriately officers acted in this case.]

Stop trying to cover up for you administration's mistakes!

Lt. Howard rode with Bruce Weaver to the grandmother's house and Bruce Weaver picked up the phone from the grandmother and gave the phone to Lt. Howard who did whatever with it and returned it to Bruce Weaver the next morning at SOC.

He came to the school before Bruce Weaver or the parents got there. 30 mins later Bruce Weaver shows up and Lt. Howard gives him the phone and leaves.

The grandmother and student show up about 10 mins later and the mother showed up about 30 mins later.

Bruce gave the phone or disc they copied the pictures on (that they claim they don't have)to Mrs Jones and her and officer Chandler went and looked at them and came back into the meeting room.

Get your facts together before you speak.

[Ed Note: Yes, the argument that the phone was "lost" as opposed to stolen is tenuous. I wouldn't want to have to make that case in court!]

Why didn't the parents call DPD if their kid was being threatened. Oh, yea, the mama already knew the cops quite well. They wanted to make trouble, that's all.

[Ed Note: Yeah, and why did the grandmother go to the newspaper instead of calling the police? Sure seems like 911 would have been easier to dial than running down Tawnelle!]

Picking a phone up off the ground is not stealing it.

Making harassing phone calls to a student, no matter what, is wrong.

No DISD employee would bring porn to school via their personnel laptop in fear of being exposed or even let go.

There were two wrongs in this story: the student not turning in the phone to the office (morals?) and the employee not being professional towards the student....

DISD doesnt have time to focus on this petty stuff you guys, DISD is trying to the best the best urban school district by 2010.... and then what? thats the question to ask and not why some guy is getting harassed by Dallas cover ups...

[Ed Note: So would it be safe to say that if someone found the keys to your car, that you dropped on the ground, and then drove your car and sold it--that wouldn't be theft either?]

I have already admitted on this web site to being really old. So here is my silly question.

Do schools no longer have a LOST AND FOUND?

Why is it not stealing to have found said phone and instead of takeing it to the office you took it home?

If a child finds a school soccer ball on the school grounds after school and takes it home, what do you call that? BORROWING?

What if a student drops his lunch money and another kid picks it up and spends it?

Would Andy and Barney call that keepers weepers or would they explain the difference to Opie ? Get Real!

Editor: "So would it be safe to say that if someone found the keys to your car, that you dropped on the ground, and then drove your car and sold it--that wouldn't be theft either?"

No, it would not be safe to say b/c the law clearly states that stealing a car is illegal...but, no law says that you can't pickup a phone off the ground and circulate the media on the phone....

No matter what you think is stealing or not, I question the employees's moral terpitude as a public school educator...

He ought to be fired. One less idiot in DISD. We already have enough to deal with, like getting all Sp. Ed. kids to pass TAKS and a Sp. Ed. administration that doesn't know how to interpret TEA guidelines for the 1% and 2% rule.

Get rid of the trash.

[Ed Note: You should probably talk to your lawyer about the statement in the first paragraph. Ours seems to think that the whole thing constitutes theft--on the part of several individuals and an organization. I'm not excited about people bringing questionable photos into the schoo, but where do you draw the line? How about you as a parent? Does the District have a right to ban certain content on your private cell phone--or search it at their whim?]

We are trying to be number 1! SO what? who cares? Does anyone else see the relevence relation to this?

What does this have to do with the article?

They are trying...WHAT?!HELLO!

Frankly I am not amused;just bored.It would seem ok with you as long as it didn't happen to you or your kid.

What about the fact that the kid sold the phone for 20 bucks?!

Why would someone do that? To get rid of evidence?

Knowingly and with intent is always in our penal codes.

The first 10 admendments to the U.S. Constitution are the bill of rights, how many were violated?

If you give a corrupt person power it will be abused and corrupted. Absolute power /absolute corruption.

What to do when more than one agency is involved?

Is this the beginning of something?

[Ed Note: I still wonder why the family didn't call 911 if they felt like they were being threatened or harassed? Seems a lot easier to dial than tracking down a reporter at the newspaper!]

DISD should take note of every single other school district in the area (you know, the more successful ones) and just use the city's cops to handle this stuff.

I'm starting to think the only reason Dallas has so many problems in general is because there are too many different arms of power (Dallas Police, DART Police, DISD Police....).

It's stupid! Why?

Because the lines of power/jurisdiction are blurred beyond all recognizable sense. What's next?

A prison especially for DISD... maybe a special jailhouse for those who speed in the HOV lane? Only in Dallas...

Police Everywhere ?

Yes -- there are DISD, RISD, County, State, Hospital, College, Transportation, and other police fighting crime within the Dallas city limits. The Dallas Police Department and City Council LOVE it this way because only the City Of Dallas Police Department crimes show up on the FBI / Uniform Crime Reporting statistics for the City Of Dallas. If all the other departmental crimes were combined with crimes from Dallas P.D., Dallas might well lead the nation in all categories of reportable crimes. DART alone has thousands of crimes each year that do not get "mingled" in with City Of Dallas crimes -- even though they transpire within Dallas City limits.

That is why it is just GREAT to have a half dozen police agencies acting independently. The action adds to the "smoke and mirrors" and causes an inaccurate total crime picture.

What Phone Number For Police Emergency ?

A police emergency occurs while riding on a DART bus or train. Out comes the cell phone and "911" is dialed --- whoops ... WRONG ! One needs to look around the DART vehicle to fine the 214-xxx-xxxx number for DART Police. They have jurisdiction there. While on public school property and a crime is observed -- does one call the DISD police or "911" ? .. While in a Dallas hospital and police are needed -- does one call "911" or hospital security?

The above are great questions. And remember, delays in calling the correct phone number can result in further property loss, injury or death to a victim. What a predicament Dallas citizens find themselves in at times --- let alone a visitor to our city.

[Ed Note: Everytime I've called 911, they have transferred me to DART PD or DISD. But others seem to have had other experiences.]

Do you not think that all cities have more than one police agency?

[Ed Note: Certainly they do! The question is: do we need one here--and if so, what do they do. As it turns out, we're in the process of answering this question and we were surprised with the answer we've arrived at. Is your curiosity peaked yet?]

DISD has a police department that does more on a daily basis than Dallas PD ever did.

Dallas PD simply did not have the staffing devoted to the schools that the DISD Police have. The officers on the campus level, care about their students and have a vested interest in their success.

The officers interact and establish a positive relationship with the students on the campus which enables them to recieve information from the students in regards to weapons on campus, drugs on campus, etc.

Sure there will be people who say that Dallas PD did better and they liked them in the schools better, etc.

But for the most part the positive relationships being built between DISD Police and the students are invaluable. These relationships can't be measured by numbers, no open records request will show this information...but it's there.

Students lives are being impacted daily, on a positive note, by these officers.

Also, DISD Police Officers handle matters that Dallas Police Officers wouldn't handle. There have been cases of officers assisting parents in cases of academic fraud, talking to students about a kid running away from home, etc. These aren't things that Dallas Police Officers would do on a regular basis.

In regards to the Hill situation there are just too many variables at play to determine why a report was not taken.

Also something to note, if I remember correctly anything that an employee has on the campus is subject to search if reasonable suspicion exists.

Dallas ISD has had a police department what 4 years now? Why not go back and see where DART PD was after 4 years. Were they making arrests, filing cases, etc? How about the Constable offices in the first 4 years? DISD Police is still new, and there are going to be growing pains.

[Ed Note: See this is exactly where I thought you were going to head with this. You're making a lot of claims here. If this department chooses to remain closed, somewhat of a "secret" police department, then does it really function in the best interest of the District and its taxpayers?

You sound like someone who has a vested interest in this department. Perhaps you can help document some of these claims.]

I'm curious as to how you feel that the department is "closed." You seem to be the one who is not open to the facts of the matter. You claim that points made are unsubstantiated and ask for me to agree with you on that fact. I do not agree. While the points can not be backed with numbers does not mean that they are no valid points.

You want facts that can be substantiated. Here's an example. How about the decrease in cheese arrests and the increase in calls requesting help. This shows that they are keeping the drugs off of campus but still getting the message.

Dallas PD is giving up the Freeways to the County Sheriff's so that they can increase their presence in the neighborhoods. They are cutting ICP and other programs to help respond to calls. However you continue to say that Dallas PD could handle all of the situations within the schools. That seems to directly contradict what is going on in the real world....

[Ed Note: Well, before going any further, let's look at your previous post:

As I say: you seem to have a vested interest in this department, perhaps you can help them produce documents and records to back some or all of this up.]

Allen all you have to do is an open records request to Dallas ISD Police CID to get the number of investigations conducted by the CID Detectives, arrests made by officers and detectives, cases filed by DISD Police Detectives, and even the monthly Chief Blotter which will support and substantiate what DISD Police have been doing in the 4 years since their transition from a security force to a police department.

[Ed Note: They deny quite a bit of this based on FERPA. I'm working to try and get more information. I've just ben swamped of late.]

What the heck is FERPA?

[Ed Note: Google is your friend]

Allen--maybe you simply mispoke there? POLICE do not *prosecute.* District Attorneys do.

Any criminal case on a campus must still go to the DA's office. And they do. One of the questions asked by a DPD or DISD PD cop in a matter witnessed by a teacher is, "By making this statement, are you willing to appear in court to testify to this, if you are called?"

Now, that could be seen as intimidation, but more often, it is because they will go for a case on a major fight or drug deal, only to have the teacher back out of fear of retaliation by the student or his family. If the adult who witnessed the incident refuses to testify, why pursue it?

Also, and this will sound strange, but not all "gang activity" is prosecutable. Most of it is more disciplinary. Tagging, fights, yep. Go to court, especially now with the cameras installed. But the wearing of colors, or the posting up on the corner? Well, harder to prosecute. Kids (sigh) still have rights, too.

I agree with the observation that many of the DISD cops have built relationships with the students and faculty. Something not seen by DPD. In fact, most DPD cops were told to stay in their offices, or in their cars, as not to antagonize the kids.

You ask for documentation? Well, tell us how to *document* kids talking to the cop as they walk in the door in the morning. How do you *document* the interaction that is not written down? Are you suggesting that the DISD PD keep a log of every kid they talk to? Every smile they get?

The issue you keep bringing up about transparency is valid for ALL governmental agencies. If there was dereliction of duty, okay. If there was suppression--well, again, that goes more to the DISD top brass. The cops, in my opinion, are not personally interested in the statistics. Kind of like ticket quotas in speed traps. Unless you want to mandate obvious enforcement by tickets, how do you judge it? I mean, because there is less crime reported in Highland Park, does that mean their PD does a great job in protection, or do they cover it up? (Well, in the case of underage drinking, I guess they do, don't they?)

[Ed Note: Note to self: we're officially picking on Highland Park now! You bring up an interesting point. How do you document interaction between police officers and kids? I'd bring up another point: can that interaction only happen between a DISD police officer and a kid, or could this positive interaction happen between others (teachers, principals, hall monitors, security personnel, etc.) and the kid? We need to get down to brass tacks. Again, what benefit is there for DISD to have its own police department?]

DISD Police use more discretion when it comes to criminal charges.

When DPD was on the campus they would just arrest, or write tickets at the drop of a hat.

DISD Police take an extra step and many times write incident reports and refer the matter to be handled by the principal in lieu of citations or arrests taking place.

There are times when students should be prosecuted, then there are times that the teacher or administrator is just as wrong and the student shouldn't get a ticket.

This discretion is used by officers on the street everyday. The officers inside the school have the ability to handle a situation with the administration instead of instantly making a student a criminal.

Benefits? Allow me to list a few:

More officers on the campus. DISD Police have an officer assigned to every High School and is in the process of staffing all of the middle schools.

Officers who are more aware of the Texas Education Code. Able to assist administrators with the law.

Officers who have a vested interest in the children and want to see the students succeed. Most of the officers came to DISD to interact with the students and to help them.

Handles call for service that would normally have fallen to Dallas PD. Thereby freeing up Dallas PD to handle calls in the community (remember they have to answer ALL alarms now)

Assisting other agencies with school related issues. The officers know their kids and often times are contacted by other agencies (Dallas PD, DART, other Police Departments) to assist in criminal investigations.

There are more but I am interested in seeing your response to there. You seem to question the need for the department, but I would be interested into why you feel that way.

[Ed Note: I highlighted a portion of your post. It agrees with what a Dallas Police Sergeant said about DISD PD. It would also tend to explain why a report wasn't taken in the situation at the Junior High.

Again, I'm asking why DISD has sworn peace officers--and what job they do that can't be done by other school personnel.]

Allen, you ask what why some of their work can't be done by other DISD personnel? As for interactions with students, yea, anyone can.

A librarian can talk to kids and steer them away from trouble. But DISD personnel, CANNOT HANDCUFF, MACE, ARREST OR TICKET. Only a COP can.

Several people have now posted that while we respect DPD, they could not meet the demands put on them by DISD Schools. If you argue on cost, okay, then as you say: show me a better way. You have three options:

1. Use DPD only--they tried it and did not like the results.

2. Use "security" only, no armed response, no arrest ability. Kind of like the respect shown for the parking lot attendant, right?

3. Have a DISD PD. That is what they are doing now.

Two years ago, I walked into my high school during the first week of summer school. A mother told me she had witnessed a teenager seemingly sell drugs to kids as they boarded the buses to other high schools for classes. So, I called DISD PD with a description and facts as she knew them.

THE VERY NEXT DAY, DISD PD had at least one unit in civilian clothes there to observe. (I would say, "Undercover," but let's not get all "Law and Order" here.) They were able to ID what was going on, and let's just say, the problem was solved.

Now, I am NOT slamming DPD. BUT! If I had called the subdivision or even Narcotics, they would have taken the report, and eventually, maybe, someone would have come along in a week or so. The beat cop would drive by, but the kid would have just moved his business elsewhere until he went around the corner.

By having our own dept, DISD could use immediate resources to ID the kid and stop what could have been a BIG problem, as that was the summer of "cheese."

[Ed Note: I would be interested in seeing the arrest and incident reports. I do know that DPD used to bring drug dogs into schools to sniff out drugs in lockers and such. Do you know if that is still being done?]

While visiting a school last year, the drug dogs did come in a sweep the school. All it takes is a phone call to the PTA president or even the school. They will tell you yes or no about the drug dogs and if it is a method that is still employed in the DISD.

They have brought drug dogs in, but it is kept on the down low. The district doesn't want taxpaying people to know about and yet another issue that is going relatively unchecked. For example, a first grader brought three rocks of crack to Highland Meadows Elementary this year! When the principal called the DISD police AND her Learning Community Leader, no one responded. She requested the dogs-no response.

Most employees will tell you that this year the response by DISD cops is not as quick or efficient as it once was. The main reason is that the district has crucified another of the few competent employees who care about kids and customer service. I am talking about Assistant Police Chief Donovon Collins. He was axed because of a degree from a "non-accredited" university. The investigation was bogus-based on a anonymous complaint (remember the 3 cops a few weeks ago? It is illegal to investigate cops based on anonymous complaints!)

I guess it just hasn't gotten bad enough for people to start asking real hard questions about this district and it's "leadership" that operates in a manner reminiscent of the mafia.

[Ed Note: Since when is it illegal to investigate cops based on "anonymous complaints?" It might be negligent not to investigate anonymous complaints.]

Collins quit, he was not fired. Not to mention the fact that everyone wants to preach about accountability but using a non accredited degree in an attempt to gain an advancement in the career. That would be a violation of state law. But lets increase accountability.

Allen I believe she is referring to the government code which requires that a complaint against a police officer must be in writing prior to an investigation being conducted.

Highland Meadows. Someone might want to let this writer that absolutely nothing can be done legally to anyone under the age of 10. Plus there might just be more to that situation.

[Ed Note: I think that's a requirement for an IAD (internal affairs) investigation, not a criminal investigation, isn't it?]

DISD has used drug dogs, but it is expensive, and they do not own one. They have to be scheduled in advance.

In the past, the schools were tipped off they were coming.

Drugs would disappear for a few days. When they have surprised the campus, believe it or not, it was actually great to find out that on my campus of over 2,000 kids, they found maybe 4-5 kids holding anything. Now, if it were 1975, come on, the numbers would have been way higher.

The "cheese" thing was a wake up call to DISD and the city.

Push for the money for a drug dog dedicated to DISD, then you would really see deterrence in action!

Also there is a distinct difference between refusing to enforce the law and exercising discretion. A quick lesson in law for you. There are very few occasions in the law which requires an arrest (family violence, violation of protective order, etc). Some departments go further than that and remove discretion on other items (DWI, Suspended License, etc). But other than those situations the officer has some discretion on what actions to take.

According to your reasoning if an officer fails to write a ticket or make an arrest on an offense than he is not keeping true to his oath of office. Then using that same line of reasoning, if a Dallas Police officer stops you or your family for speeding are you going to insist that he write you a ticket so that he is not violating his oath of office? Or would it be alright for him to give you a warning because you weren't going "too" fast.

[Ed Note: I'm not talking about discretion. Let's go back to the Hill incident. If an officer refuses to investigate or take a report regarding possible gang activity, don't you think this stretches that oath a bit?

I'd be interested in examples of situations where the Dallas Police might make an arrest, but where DISD Police would not--and the justification for the example.]

I have read the majority of the comments on this stream and see that there are two main arguments: Why does DISD have a police department and arguments in favor of them having a police department.

The fact is that most, if not all, large school districts need a police department to handle the specialized policing needs of the districts. This should be the safety and security of the students and faculty, along with investigating crimes that occur on the campus, or within the jurisdiction of the agency. The secondary benefit of having the school district police departments is that it relieves the municipality or county law enforcement from having to deal with the issues in the districts, and allows them to primarily focus on their residents. Unfortunately, once district politics get involved, the primary course and scope of the department, if you will, becomes a bit blurry.

A second fact is that agencies such as school districts, college districts, hospital districts, transit authorities, railroad commissions, etc... need, and have, separate police agencies to handle their issues. They are a fact of life, whether you agree with their existence or not. So arguing for or against is a waste of time.

Now, what needs to be addressed it the fact that the police administrators of these agencies tend to have their hands tied and have to restrict their officer's activities at the direction of a body of government that is normally looking out for the best interest of that body of government. Having said that, each governmental entity has it's own set of problems and political issues, so some of these problems are not just restricted to the specialized agencies. The bottom line is that these officers are quite frequently restricted from performing normal police functions due to the policies set from their board of directors. Why does this happen? I would venture to say bad publicity, crime statistics, money, and a wealth of other reasons.

Okay, there are two things that need to be addressed here. The second is the actions of individuals. If, in fact, officers acted in a manor that was not according to their policies or in a manner that brought discredit to their agencies, then they should be dealt with on an individual basis. Just because you question the actions of one or two officers, does that negate the purpose of the department? No. If that were the case, we would not have a police agency in America.

By far, the majority of the law enforcement agencies in America are honest, hard working men and women, who have a need to serve their community. Unfortunately, you do get a few people, wearing a police uniform, who might have been meant for a different occupation. That being said, a few people not meant for the job does not ruin the department or the profession. Let's give the department a break and focus on actual violations by individuals. If it is determined that the officers acted in the wrong, deal with them and stop lumping them in with the good ones.

But, that's just my opinion.

NewGuy out.

[Ed Note: But you hit the nail on the head. You raised the issue of the police department looking out for the special interests of the organization. I'd go a step further and add: "at the expense of law enforcement."

An interesting scenario might be to attach the DISD police to the Dallas Police as a special unit--such that there would be external oversight on the department? It would also open the department up to the resources available to the Dallas Police.]