CARS HOMES JOBS

Schenectady cops’ stripper party draws discipline

Department cites ‘poor judgment’ at Christmas bash

January 25, 2013
Updated 10:45 p.m.
Text Size: A | A

Schenectady Public Safety Commissioner Wayne E. Bennett is shown in a file photo.
Schenectady Public Safety Commissioner Wayne E. Bennett is shown in a file photo.

— The Schenectady Police Department is punishing several officers for their poor judgment in bringing strippers to the midnight platoon’s Christmas party, the department said in Friday.

The department did not announce who made that decision, but said certain officers were “found to have exercised poor judgment resulting in discredit being brought on the department.”

The department did not specify the number of officers disciplined or the nature of the penalties.

Related story

View the Dec. 22 story "Schenectady cops chastised for hiring strippers."

The officers and the strippers were observed by at least three witnesses, according to the department’s press release. At least two of the witnesses were dating or married to officers attending the party, and became irate when they saw the strippers. Another witness was a Gazette reporter.

All of the witnesses were barred from entering the party, held at Johnny Goo’s Clam Shack in Schenectady. But the bar has two large door windows, which provide an unimpeded view of the stripper pole set in the center of a large table inside.

Officers gathered around the table as women danced provocatively. There were concerns that some officers could have gone too far and touched the women sexually, which would be a crime. But police interviewed every employee at the bar and all of the officers who attended the party, and determined that none of the officers broke the law.

“No credible evidence was found,” the department said in a press release.

Although the event was well-attended by platoon members and the platoon sergeant, Chief Brian Kilcullen said he knew nothing of it until he was notified through a Daily Gazette inquiry the day after the party.

He immediately said the officers exercised “poor judgment” in hiring the strippers, and launched an investigation. After the report was completed Friday, Kilcullen and Public Safety Commissioner Wayne Bennett declined to answer any questions.

Mayor Gary McCarthy said they had not discussed any other actions with him, including new policies to better regulate the annual platoon parties.

“We hope that people just use better judgment,” McCarthy said. “Although we do have higher expectations for them 24/7, you can’t regulate the lives and behavior totally when they’re off-duty.”

Some City Council members had said police leaders should consider new policies: that all official parties be “family-friendly” and safe transportation plans made for all events that include alcohol.

Bennett had said officers should be mature enough to avoid driving drunk without an official policy. But he had said he would consider it and other ideas.

Council President Margaret King said she would be willing to discuss those ideas, but said she thinks disciplining the officers involved is enough.

“I’m satisfied with the current actions,” she said. “Hopefully, they’ve learned their lesson.”

 
Share story: print print email email facebook facebook reddit reddit

comments

January 25, 2013
3:24 p.m.
clifford says...

Shocker, comment deleted... dont have a comment section if you only keep the ones you like.

January 25, 2013
4:01 p.m.
jpatrick says...

We encourage posts that discuss the issues. We will delete comments that are off-topic, untrue or make baseless accusations. We will delete comments that resort to name-calling. Please be civil. Don't, for example, call police officers names. Don't resort to personal attacks. Don't be vulgar, crude or bully other commenters.

Judy Patrick

January 25, 2013
4:20 p.m.
kmiac says...
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
January 25, 2013
4:37 p.m.
swilliams says...

It seems straightforward and factual to me.

January 25, 2013
4:45 p.m.
kmiac says...
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
January 25, 2013
6:16 p.m.
CalvinHobbes says...

Even the most cynical cop basher among the public is hard pressed to see the value in this story. Sadly this is another example by which the Administration of SPD demonstrated how they weakly succumb to the pressure of the media. For Wayne Bennett to justify punishment in this matter is a travesty of justice in its own right. This action is another example that validates the sad fact that neither he nor the administration will not stand behind their men, no matter how absurd the accusation.

January 25, 2013
6:24 p.m.
reader1 says...

CalvinHobbes

you mean like when they supported them after the shooting?

January 25, 2013
6:57 p.m.
Root_Beer says...

That party was on off duty time and the cops are adults and should be able to participate in adult activity. It was a private party and should have stayed that way. Try following all the high jinx of all the elected officials and I'm sure a better story and some criminal charges "may" come out. It's not kindergarten get on with your life people.

January 25, 2013
7:39 p.m.
Bwarren14 says...

I believe it has been said that "an officer is always on duty". If they refer to this as their christmas party for work or platoon party, whether on duty or not they should conduct themselves in a matter in which is respected by the public, their spouses and the department. Nowhere in this article did Ms Moore say she had a source or a "criminal source" at that and if she did have a source obviously they were correct, so I believe the name calling and immaturity should stop. Its clearly evident that in no way were Moore's articles false, considering the department as well as the stripping company admitted they were there. Maybe instead of throwing a bachelor party for a holiday party these officers should invite their wives and act with class plain and simple. Although I doubt any consequence will be handed out to these men, I feel Mr. Bennett and the Chief are correct in thinking there should be some.

January 25, 2013
7:42 p.m.
bluelinecop says...
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
January 25, 2013
7:44 p.m.
reader1 says...

what difference does it make who she married? how is that relevant

January 25, 2013
7:53 p.m.
kmiac says...
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
January 25, 2013
10:32 p.m.
Bwarren14 says...

Ok I've read every article Ms. Moore wrote about this topic and nowhere in any of them did she say she had some source. Obviously she just found out about this party and brought it to the publics knowledge. Are you speaking on factual information or just assumptions? Seems to me that the officers are looking for someone to blame. If some mystery source didn't comment about it then how do you know they lied about what they saw or if there even is a source at all? Maybe just maybe Ms. Moore is reporting factual information that has clearly been proven and the officers who attended the party aren't happy that they got caught doing something their superiors don't approve of. As far as this party is concerned, I know all about Tops in Bottoms, and how guys can behave when alcohols involved. I'm not accusing anybody of anything but I wouldn't be surprised if this story was very sugar coated. And in regards to who whether Ms. Moore is married or not, what in gods creation does that have to do with this story? Oh that's right absolutely nothing and its extremely ignorant and immature. Let's stick to discussing the matter at hand and act like adults.

January 25, 2013
10:52 p.m.
Bwarren14 says...

I read the article in the times union as well which states an officers girlfriend made the report, however it doesn't mention any names. So your either assuming you know who it is, or its not true at all. So you mean to tell me an officer dates the type of person you just described? I find that hard to believe. Unless your an officer yourself and were at this party or work with the people who were, which would make sense why you have such a strong opinion on the matter and are making so many accusations. If you are an officer and assuming there's any truth to what you just said I guess that means you just did two things; Disrespected a fellow officers wife/girlfriend and then blatantly disrespected him as well.

January 25, 2013
11:30 p.m.
kmiac says...

You may want to research again before you post something, you make yourself look ignorant. As a matter of fact Mrs. Moore does admit to having a source, as sited also by the times union. And lets do some logical thinking shall we moore states "upset wives and girlfeiends stood outsise angrly texting and calling other people while watching their s.o inside dancing with the strippers" what wife or girlfriend do you know would just sit out side and watch something they disprove of?? Does any of that have any logic? Also, I fail to see how this is a matter of anyones business besides those involved and their wives. Nothing illegal took place, and it is rediculious that this has become such an issue. Mrs. Moore just writes any negative story about the spd she can and the gazette runs with it. Where is the write up about the raid on a clinton st apt that netted $75-100,000 in street value drugs, 2 hand guns and a rifel along with $4000 cash?? You didnt see that because it shows something positive about the department. The SCHENECTADY paper had nothing to do with it,, but it was all over news 6!! You see my point. Becacse guys who just so happen to be off suty and just so happened to hire strippers, and just happen to be employed as cops, does not mean they can not do their job and do it well.

January 26, 2013
12:25 a.m.
Bwarren14 says...

Times Union states an officers Girlfriend made a report to the Gazette however I have yet to see any article in the gazette that states that. Instead I see this article which states a member of the gazette was there and saw it all go down, and that THREE witnesses were interviewed and saw what happened as well. Your saying one "criminal source" had some big conspiracy with Ms. Moore and came to these findings, but it seems to be all factual to me, admitted by the department, the bar, and the strippers as well as three witnesses. So unless you know more than everyone else the assumptions should stop. Chief Mark Chairs referred to this party as the Platoon Christmas Party, attended by ONLY OFFICERS, wives not invited and it was private. Sounds shady to me. considering its associated with the police department and the Chief himself called it the christmas party I do not find it appropriate that these men who are held to a higher standard should be hiring strippers esp Tops in Bottoms strippers for their platoon parties whether off duty or not. I'm sure that SPD has done many positive things, that is their job to serve and protect. But this particular story is not about their positives.

January 26, 2013
1:40 a.m.
kmiac says...

Well there was not three witnesses just one. And multiple people know who she is. And if the story that was first reported was true people would have gotten arrested. So again ms moores story is not factual. What seems to be factual to you and what is reality are different.

January 26, 2013
2:53 a.m.
Bwarren14 says...

The first story reported? I believe it only stated that off duty police officers hired Tops in Bottoms strippers for their holiday platoon party and that an investigation is going to be done. That's all I remember from the first article no other accusations. and what makes you so sure there wasn't 3 witnesses if it was just stated that there was. It was also stated that a member of the gazette team saw all this so is that the one witness you speak of? I still do not understand what makes you so certain if you have no facts to back up these findings, and whether someone reported it or not, who cares? It was obviously true there were strippers at the party that was proven. I'm not quite sure why you seem to be lashing out at one particular individual and Ms. Moore for something that police officers did wrong. It appears to me that you just want to blame people, or have a hatred for Ms. Moore for doing her job and for whomever you think reported it. It seems to me that correcting these classless parties should be the topic of conversation instead of bad mouthing people, or making ignorant comments about a reporter or officers wives/girlfriends. I'm also sure if anything illegal or inappropriate went down that the officers involved wouldn't admit it or throw each other under the bus in an internal investigation anyway. It was also stated in Times Union that a few officers refused to attend the party until the strippers had left because they too felt it was inappropriate. So that to me says something, maybe everyone should have conducted themselves with the same intelligence and this whole thing wouldn't be going on. This wasn't a bachelor party the last time I checked it was referred to as the "Platoon Holiday Party"

January 26, 2013
3:10 a.m.
Bwarren14 says...
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
January 26, 2013
4:04 a.m.
kmiac says...
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
January 26, 2013
5:38 a.m.
dmorgan says...

I've previously posted this whole thing elicits a yawn at best. I would like to see more stories on the actual performance of the Schenectady cops. What's the response time to calls? Is that info kept? How about that warrant backlog? Any progress? Anecdotes about drug raids don't really impress me. Are they really performing better than days of old? With all the overtime, are there anymore Dwayne Johnson's? Ms. Moore did uncover that. Tell me instead of reporting the party line that the Schenectady cops have been fixed. I hate to say it, but it's the same team running the show when John Lewis was around.

January 26, 2013
6 a.m.
kmiac says...
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
 

columnists & blogs


Log into Dailygazette.com

Forgot Password?

Subscribe

Username:
Password: