Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 5 comments | Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Philipp served Austin well
Published Thursday, February 4, 2010
When a man retires after 31 years protecting and serving the public, they should hold a retirement party for him in the county jail.
Let him take a victory lap around the cellblock where lawbreakers, he or the officers he commanded, now reside.
Let offenders see a person who put public safety first ahead of his own.
Let them see somebody who wore a badge and a grin to work every day. The badge and blue uniform only made him a target.
Because of the job, they often suffered verbal, physical and emotional abuse.
Does anybody remember when police officers were called “pigs?”
When I was a kid, a long, long time ago, it was fun for a miscreant like me, to ask a friend “What are pennies made of?”
The answer was “copper” and when it was delivered with a shout, we would run away laughing from our childish act.
Calling a police officer a “copper” pales in comparison to the curses and epithets directed at police officers today in more than the English language.
I’m all for the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. I just don’t want criminals to bear weapons designed for the express purpose of killing or maiming people.
Of course, not all police officers are perfect human beings. Some are fallible to temptation, bad behavior and mistakes. They break the public trust and other peace officers’ trust, and should be punished.
Paul M. Philipp is not one of those individuals.
Austin’s police chief was honored at a retirement party in the training room at the Austin Mower County Law Enforcement Center last Friday (Jan. 29).
The day before, he said “goodbye” to the men and women of the Austin Police Department.
Everybody was there. Wife, son, mayors past and present, council members, the sheriff, county attorney, media representatives, and peace officers: Everybody who appreciated his professionalism.
I don’t like to brag, but the chief and I go way back.
It was October 1990, when I wrote a story for the Austin Daily Herald, reporting his selection for the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s academy for the nation’s top lawmen.
This Lee Bonorden effort was marred only by a misspelling: an “S” appeared at the end of his last name in the headline, lead paragraph and throughout the story.
That’s “S” as in stupid reporter mistake.
I got it right in future police chief stories, but that faux pas lingered on my mind and came up in conversation at the chief’s retirement party.
The chief said he hadn’t forgotten it either. I couldn’t tell if he was smiling or not.
The police chief was a hands-on officer. True Story.
One day he came upon teenagers fighting in a street. He arrested one of my granddaughters for being one of the combatants.
Actually, it continued a lengthy series of Austin police officers’ interaction with my grandchildren who misbehaved.
I’m not proud of this, and the only reason I share it publicly is to underline that I’ve never considered myself a suck-up to people who bear a badge.
That’s why I felt semi-comfortable calling the two men appointed to fill in as interim police chief as “half-chiefs.”
Nobody followed me home after the chief’s retirement party in a black-and-white, so it must not have hurt anybody’s feeling or they just considered the source.
Before announcing his retirement, the police chief made headlines for another reason: A complaint of misconduct was filed against him.
(Everyone in Austin knows how another police officer’s felony conviction in court tainted the image of all police officers. That episode should be put behind us.)
True to form and the man’s character, he said the allegations were unfounded, but an investigation in to the allegations was warranted.
I don’t know what others think and frankly I don’t care.
Paul M. Philipp was a damn good police officer and served Austin well.
My confidence in the men and women of law enforcement is not shaken. When I need help, I’m still going to call 9-1-1.
Who are you going to call?
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by RJ (anonymous) on February 4, 2010 at 3:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lee, the praises are wonderful--but WHAT prompted Phillips to leave so abruptly. No one was hired or shown the "ropes". Reporting is to tell ALL of the story.
Posted by wtraveler (anonymous) on February 4, 2010 at 4:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lee, Phillips did have a lot of success in his career, and deserves the praise that he has earned. However, he has spent a life time holding others responsible for their actions. He needs to practice what he preaches!
Posted by WhatRUSaying (anonymous) on February 4, 2010 at 4:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
WTraveler - are you suggesting that the Chief's statement that his conduct (whatever it was) deserves the current investigation, but that he is retiring to avoid having the department subjected to another drawn out scandal is somehow dodging responsibility. From where I sit, the Chief held himself to the same high standard he has held everyone else. Whatever you think of him, you must admit that he held himself responsible for his actions (whatever they were) by voluntarily giving up his career. Most in his shoes would not likely have done the same.
Posted by wtraveler (anonymous) on February 4, 2010 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thats exactly what i am suggesting! I don't believe one word of his statement. Paul phillips has been calling others out for there conduct for thirity years. Someone calls his behavior into question,,and he runs!! How convenient! He is a public offical and the public has a right to know what he is accused of, especially if its a crime.
Posted by WhatRUSaying (anonymous) on February 4, 2010 at 9:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Let's take it one step at a time so you can keep up.
First he said there was a complaint filed against him - was he lying?
Then he said that the complaint should be investigated - was he lying?
Was he dodging responsibility for his actions?
Didn't he order the investigation even though he retired?
Isn't there an investigation going on right now?
Then he said that he was retiring because of the complaint and to save the department from any further embarrassment - Was that a lie too?
Did he not retire?
Would his investigation not create further embarrassment for the department?
I am trying to find the basis for accusing the man of being dishonest.
He took his lumps even before the investigation was completed. He resigned in an act of taking responsibility even before his accuser presented any evidence. He did the honorable thing.
The fact that you believe he "ran" shows that you really don't understand what is going on. How do you run when you admit that there should be an investigation. Perhaps you were unaware that an investigation remains ongoing. That would explain your posts. If you knew that then I am at a loss to understand your point.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)