“Top shot” officer sues LAPD over social media demand

[vcdgrips]

Lots of things to unwind:

I only know what I have read in the papers and a 120 second scan of her lawsuit:

she alleges that Male and/or Older officers were not kept on restricted duty as long as she was after her shooting because of her online activities and appearance therein (their 6 months v her 12 months despite her otherwise meeting admin criterion to come of that duty in the shorter timeframe)

She alleges that males officers have similar types of online activities and have suffered no job action at al

She alleges that the Chief personally held up her promotion (nest step in the Patrol Officer series) which seems to be simply a function of time on the job because she would not stop her online activities.

She alleges that the Chief personally blocked her out of placement in a particular division and at the training academy because she would not stop her online activities and he did not like what she was wearing in a particular instance ( the alleged example depicted her shooting in competition gear and a shirt/short combo that fits like a UCLA/USC varsity volleyball player (how I would characterize if I was her counsel).

IMHO-

This seems to be a classic case of an overplayed hand by the Chief.

I can imagine that he thought that because he backed her in the shooting re all 6 shots being in policy (as opposed to on the first 4) that she should somehow be obligated to take direction from him without pushback or question.

I strongly suspect that the Chief said the things that she alleged that he said re her career AND she has corroborating witnesses and/or tape. (I.e. You were warned in word and deed and here we are- I told you that you were never coming off the desk until you stop posting stuff.)

I strongly suspect that she had the support of her father and his cadre of Union folks.

While it is entirely possible that command can consequence folks for inappropriately using their affiliation with the dept for commercial gain, where the PD/Chief may have exposure is that she was treated disparately relative to the non consequencing of similarly situated older and/or male officers.

She wants 5 mil as that is the alleged value of a 25 year LAPD Career (salary/benefits/pension/etc.)

Edited to add- I would of course defer to an experienced Labor atty who has litigated in the Central Dist of CA as this case presently pends in federal court.

[paherne]

If you represent yourself on Social Media as being employed by: XYZ

Then XYZ has the absolute ability to say, "Stop doing shit on social media or consequences."

Now, I suspect there is some dickbaggery going on overall, but the fact of the matter is the above...

Since she has a picture of herself wearing her uniform on her IG page, it's going to be difficult to make the case that being an LAPD Officer wasn't part of the whole social media persona she was curating. In which case, Admin has a right to tell her to knock it the fuck off or get fired.

And maybe the reason they told her to knock it the fuck off is because if you're involved in something like...I dunno a OIS...Your social media presence might have a disproportionate effect on the whole situation making objectivity and PR a nightmare?

I dunno, seems like just a thought.

In my, unprofessional, unpaid, opinion both Officer McBride and Chief Moore lack discretion and have exercised poor judgement. Unfortunately, in doing so they bring further scrutiny to a profession which is under harsh and constant interrogation every day.

Your assertion might have merit if not for the fact that every officer involved in an OIS in a CA metro area will have their whole life and online presence posted without context and out of context by anonymous and other scumbags. Shooting competition is a 2nd Amendment protected activity. Posting online is 1st Amendment protected activity and I know that government employees have reduced 1st Amendment protections, but at a certain point if you're going to get the blame, no matter what, you might as well play the game. If members of police agencies can go to Pride Parades and be out and proud, which is a protected activity, why can't she be a competition and shooting personality? The government, in this case, the police agency, doesn't get to pick and choose which rights it likes and which it doesn't. FTR, I have no problem with the pride parade participation, just using it as an example.

[RevolverRob]

Your assertion might have merit if not for the fact that every officer involved in an OIS in a CA metro area will have their whole life and online presence posted without context and out of context by anonymous and other scumbags. Shooting competition is a 2nd Amendment protected activity. Posting online is 1st Amendment protected activity and I know that government employees have reduced 1st Amendment protections, but at a certain point if you're going to get the blame, no matter what, you might as well play the game. If members of police agencies can go to Pride Parades and be out and proud, which is a protected activity, why can't she be a competition and shooting personality? The government, in this case, the police agency, doesn't get to pick and choose which rights it likes and which it doesn't. FTR, I have no problem with the pride parade participation, just using it as an example.

So, we are in agreement, I think the whole thing is BS, that if you're partaking in legal adult activities on your own time it should have no bearing on your professional career. But reality is different than the ideal world.

Now, while shooting activities are protected by 2A and Free Speech is protected by 1A. It's important to note - they didn't tell her to stop participating in shooting activities. They told her to stop posting about it - while being affiliated with LAPD, or possibly while just being under investigation for OIS. That actually isn't clear to me.

FWIW; I have seen the situation with an Out and Proud person - who was causing issues that were getting media coverage. HR and their boss said, "If you do not cease posting on social media about our institution you will be fired." They doubled down and subsequently got fired for it. Not because they were gay and proud, but because they didn't listen to the warning(s).

With that said, I think we have to be careful in assuming that the assertions of either party are factually correct. I'd bet my annual salary that there is more than meets the eye here. And also, I'd bet plenty of money that LAPD settles out of court and Officer McBride is just Toni McBride Gunstagram Influencer within the next 24-months.

[smells like feet]

My gut instinct here is that since we are dealing with a young lady that got hired at 20 years old and has already been involved in a shooting, had her whole life torn apart on the internet, has suffered the moral injury of feeling thrown under the bus by her bosses and is on stress leave from the department...social media is not really the issue here.

[jlw]

More power to her, but there isn't a "male equivalent" to some of the pictures she posts short of dudes posing with guns while wearing nothing but a banana hammock.

[45dotACP]

More power to her, but there isn't a "male equivalent" to some of the pictures she posts short of dudes posing with guns while wearing nothing but a banana hammock.

(Sets social media settings to private)

"Yah, that would be crazy."


But all jokes aside, I have seen people fired from my hospital for social media dipshittery. Mostly relating to posting photos or videos that had names of patients or patients in them.

Aside from that, however...my hospital has made it abundantly clear that if you name the hospital or tag them in your posts, then they have every right to decide on the effects that post has on your career.

Basically, it had better be a G rated post, or you are in deep shit.

We have a social media policy...forgot what it was exactly, but that's the gist of what I remember.



Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[TGS]

My thoughts mostly fall along the lines of @Trooper224.

I was thinking about this from the perspective of working with a hypothetical social media influencer. I personally would not feel comfortable working with an influencer, as their social media status is (to me) an indicator that their motivations and character are not in sync with what I expect for a servant. My take is that influencers use a profession, sport, etc simply as a medium to express their vanity, and that their core interest is their ego and not the job or values it's supposed to be a superficial expression of.

I fully realize that as a "xennial", my thoughts may be outdated and unrealistic, similar to how boomers think everyone younger than them is lazy, and their parents thought rock music was the devil, and their parents thought banning alcohol was a good idea, so on and so on.

But, that's the way it is, and if you are a social media influencer there's no way I'm picking you for my warrant team...and if you're assigned regardless, thanks, you're the person watching the cars. This isn't based on sex, either....if you were Officer Handsome or whatever the fuck the goobers name was that used to work at @AMC's department, I'd feel the same way but probably just openly make fun of you for it since I wouldn't have to walk on eggshells because you have a vagina and automatic EEO complaint.

[Trooper224]

My thoughts mostly fall along the lines of @Trooper224.

I was thinking about this from the perspective of working with a hypothetical social media influencer. I personally would not feel comfortable working with an influencer, as their social media status is (to me) an indicator that their motivations and character are not in sync with what I expect for a servant. My take is that influencers use a profession, sport, etc simply as a medium to express their vanity, and that their core interest is their ego and not the job or values it's supposed to be a superficial expression of.

I fully realize that as a "xennial", my thoughts may be outdated and unrealistic, similar to how boomers think everyone younger than them is lazy, and their parents thought rock music was the devil, and their parents thought banning alcohol was a good idea, so on and so on.

But, that's the way it is, and if you are a social media influencer there's no way I'm picking you for my warrant team...and if you're assigned regardless, thanks, you're the person watching the cars. This isn't based on sex, either....if you were Officer Handsome or whatever the fuck the goobers name was that used to work at @AMC's department, I'd feel the same way but probably just openly make fun of you for it since I wouldn't have to walk on eggshells because you have a vagina and automatic EEO complaint.

We're of the same mind on this. When I examine her social media, I get the impression of someone who takes some things seriously, but one of them isn't being a cop. My perceptions could be totally off base. But, perception is a large part of everything. I have no doubt some of the blowback against her is due to her father's position with the FOP. I also have little doubt she still has a job for the same reason.

[AMC]

@TGS....you're referring to "The Hot Cop". Man, have I got some stories to tell about that goofy kid. I was personally convinced he was an actual alien like Star Man, just visiting our world to learn our ways. He was THAT totally unfamiliar with normal, everyday things.

[jetfire]

I'm going to disagree a bit. I think as long as you don't have any post in reference to your department and don't post things that are stupid, it should be fine. It's a way to generate income for some folks. If I were a personal trainer and a cop I should be allowed to market my training business through social media.

I agree with your last statement actually. I think the problem is when you want to become an influencer and also lean into the whole cop thing as part of your marketing efforts for your influencer persona.