Texas system police association

Log in



<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
  • 06/06/2019 1:23 AM | Troy Mondine (Administrator)

    Several students tried to pull an officer off a student who was resisting arrest, causing a brawl with about 80 students, police and staff

    May 28, 2019

    Nicholas Filipas
    The Record, Stockton, Calif.

    STOCKTON, Calif. — Bear Creek High School was placed on lockdown Friday morning after as many as 80 students were involved in a physical altercation with police as they detained one student for fighting with staff.

    An unruly student was reported to have been uncooperative and fighting school staff and a school resource officer about 10:46 a.m. at the campus, located at 10555 Thornton Road in north Stockton

    When Stockton police arrived to detain the subject, the student instead resisted and the commotion drew the attention of about 80 other students, authorities said.

    Cellphone video of the incident that circulated on social media showed several students trying to pull an officer off the juvenile and throwing objects.

    As more police officers responded, they were reportedly struck by several students, and a garbage can was thrown at authorities and school staff, according to the report.

    The rowdy student was eventually detained and had to be escorted off campus due to the size of the crowd, officers said.

    Lodi Unified officials said in a statement that in an abundance of caution, Bear Creek High was placed on lockdown for several minutes before it was lifted.

    Police said no officers, school staff or students were injured in the brawl. The original disruptive student was cited for resisting arrest.

    In the same statement, the district said it will continue to work closely with police as they conduct their investigation.


  • 06/06/2019 12:10 AM | Troy Mondine (Administrator)

    Tanika Turner

    TSPA Representative 

    Every year in Washington D.C. officers from all of over the United States and Canada gather to celebrate the memory of police officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty. National Police Week is in their 38th year of operation. This year, thee gathering kicked off May 12, 2019. A series of events led to the finale, the memorial service with President Donald Trump as the keynote speaker.

    The events begin with the 5k race. Walkers and runners of all ages join together at the capitol to complete the race in honor of fallen law enforcement.  The 5k race is hosted by the Officer Down Memorial Page. On this page you are able to view officers who have passed away or report officers who have passed.

    The next day is the Law Enforcement United Bike Ride which began in Alexandria, Virginia. Their slogan “We Ride for Those Who Died” stresses the main purpose of the ride is to raise awareness to fallen officers. The organizations second goal is to raise money for the National Law Enforcement Officer’s Memorial and museum. According to the Police Unity Tour website they were able to donate $2.6 million this year to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund.

    The Candlelight Vigil has been a tradition that has been going on for 31 years. The street is corded off by a trail of motorcycles. People in both uniforms and plain clothes walk toward the National Mall. With the Washington Monument as a backdrop, it creates a dramatic picture. Books are given out that show the breakdown of ceremonies, with the ending being the calling of names that are being added to the memorial.

    This year, Texas had 11 officers killed in the line of duty. As each name was read, the gong of a bell could be heard. The crowd, originally lit by large lights is now lit by thousands of white pillar candles. Fathers hold their children closer and women comfort each other.

    As you sit back and look at the lit candles and all of the people holding each other, it is visual proof that the brotherhood is real. Officers, family of officers and blue supporters all come together at one spot at one time to honor the memory of those who gave the greatest sacrifice.

    One of the traditions during National Police Week is the exchange of patches. Police from all over bring their police department’s patches and trade them with other agencies. The most sought after patch is at times the patch where the largest incident has occurred.

    The hangout spot of choice is Tent City. There you can listen to music, enjoy great food or buy drinks with your friends. With over 80 vendors, you can find almost all the police gear you would like. With operating hours of 11:00 a.m. until 2 a.m., it is a safe place to have fun and hang out with all of the new law enforcement you have met.

     The D.C. Fraternal Order of Police provide a shuttle from their lodge to the vigil, the navy yard metro station, tent city and the Kelly’s Irish Times bar.

    The 38th National Peace Officers’ Memorial Service is the last event of police week. Officers, all dressed in class A uniform, stand together with their departments as speeches are given. On the west front of the United States Capitol, Donald Trump addresses the crowd.

     “Your loved ones were extraordinary and selfless Americans who gave everything they had in defense of our communities, our children and our nation.” Trump said.

    Trump went on to tell the crowd that he will always support the brothers and sisters in blue. Trump vocalized his condemnation of anti-police rhetoric. He said that those who file false police reports should face legal consequences.

    After the tribute to officers, Trump spoke of Corporal Singh, an officer who was killed around Christmas time during a traffic stop by someone who crossed the border. The president then used that time to talk about immigration.

    NPW provides a time of bonding for all officers involved. If ever you wanted a reminder of why you do the job you do, it is laid out for your eyes to see the entire week.

  • 05/30/2019 10:09 PM | Troy Mondine (Administrator)

    The suspect was charged with capital murder and attempted murder

    Duty Death: Officer William Buechner - [Auburn, Alabama]

    End of Service: 05/20/2019

    May 20, 2019


    Associated Press

    AUBURN, Ala. — A man who opened fire on police responding to a domestic disturbance report, killing one officer and wounding two others, was arrested on Monday and charged with capital murder, authorities said.

    Grady Wayne Wilkes, 29, was being held without bond in the shooting death of Officer William Buechner, who had been with the Auburn Police Division for more than 13 years.

    <img class="ContentAside-img" src="https://media-praetorian.netdna-ssl.com/article-images/Officer%20William%20Buechner.jpg?w=300&amp;format=jpg&amp;quality=87" alt="Officer William Buechner, who was killed while responding to a domestic disturbance report on Sunday, May 19, 2019. (Auburn Police Department via AP)" data-responsive-img > Officer William Buechner, who was killed while responding to a domestic disturbance report on Sunday, May 19, 2019. (Auburn Police Department via AP)Officer William Buechner, who was killed while responding to a domestic disturbance report on Sunday, May 19, 2019. (Auburn Police Department via AP)

    Related article

    Wilkes also was charged with attempted murder in the wounding of officers Webb Sistrunk and Evan Elliott, said Police Chief Paul Register. Both are expected to recover.

    District Attorney Brandon Hughes said authorities would seek capital punishment: "If you shoot a police officer, we're going to seek the death penalty, absolutely," he said.

    The chief described Wilkes as a former member of the military who was working in the area and hadn't had previous contact with police. The "Blue Alert" sent out after the officers were shot described him as wearing camouflage body armor and a helmet.

    But with helicopters hovering overhead, he didn't get far. An intense, overnight manhunt led to Wilkes' arrest about nine hours after the shootings, less than a mile from the Arrow Head Trailer Park, where the officers were hit. Information from a citizen helped police and U.S. marshals take him down.

    The chief called the arrest "relatively uneventful" and said no one was injured bringing him into custody. A booking photo released by police showed Wilkes with red marks and apparent bruises on his face, but a police spokesman did not respond to an email seeking information about his appearance.

    The person who called police wasn't hurt, the chief said, but Wilkes also was charged with domestic violence.

    Court records weren't available immediately to show whether Wilkes had a lawyer. Register wouldn't comment on details of the investigation.

    The Lee County coroner Bill Harris said the officer who was killed died in an emergency room.

    "This is probably the worst day of my time here," Register said. "Words cannot express the loss for this family, our family and this community."

    Gov. Kay Ivey decried the violence.

    "This is so tragic and so useless. I'm just heartbroken," she said Monday during an appearance in Montgomery.

    A woman from Coffee County, located south of Auburn, had asked a judge in November for a court order protecting her from abuse by Wilkes, records show.

    She wrote in a court document that Wilkes, who had an Enterprise address at the time, sexually assaulted her while she was incapacitated, and she feared he would harm her after learning she was pressing charges. She is married to another man.

    The judge refused a protection order following a hearing in January, ruling that the woman didn't have a "qualifying relationship" with Wilkes, whom she said she did not know before the alleged assault.

    There is no record of sexual assault charges against Wilkes, who records show doesn't have a criminal record in Alabama.

  • 05/30/2019 10:06 PM | Troy Mondine (Administrator)

    The solid bedrock of Graham v. Connor provides a strong foundation for LEOs doing the work few in society are willing to do

    May 23, 2019

      By Lance J. LoRusso, Esq.

      Cited over 54,000 times and the subject of nearly 1,200 law review articles, [1] one cannot overstate the profound effect of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Graham v. Connor on American law enforcement.

      Often equally praised and maligned, the relatively short decision issued on May 15, 1989, held that the use of force by law enforcement officers (LEOs) must be judged by an objective standard of reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. However, the rationale of that decision, and the statements made during the discussion, still spur controversy 30 years later.

      <img class="ContentAside-img" src="https://media-praetorian.netdna-ssl.com/article-images/gramv.jpg?w=300&amp;format=jpg&amp;quality=87" alt="Graham v. Connor is an excessive force case arising from the detention and release of a suspicious person by City of Charlotte officer M.S. Connor. (Photo/PoliceOne)" data-responsive-img > Graham v. Connor is an excessive force case arising from the detention and release of a suspicious person by City of Charlotte officer M.S. Connor. (Photo/PoliceOne)Graham v. Connor is an excessive force case arising from the detention and release of a suspicious person by City of Charlotte officer M.S. Connor. (Photo/PoliceOne)

      Related articles

      The excessive force case behind Graham v. Connor

      Graham v. Connor is an excessive force case arising from the detention and release of a suspicious person by City of Charlotte officer M.S. Connor.

      On November 12, 1984, diabetic Dethorne Graham asked his friend to drive him to a convenience store so he could purchase some orange juice as he believed he was about to have an insulin reaction. Facing a long line upon entering the store, Graham quickly exited, got back into his friend’s car and asked him to drive to a friend’s house.

      Graham’s short stay and rapid exit attracted the attention of City of Charlotte (N.C.) police officer M.S. Connor who stopped the car. He detained Graham and the driver until he could establish that nothing untoward occurred at the convenience store.

      During the stop, Graham exited his friend’s car, ran around it and passed out. He was handcuffed and placed onto Connor’s hood. At that point, he came to and pleaded with the officers to get him some sugar. Graham’s friend came to the scene with orange juice, but the officers refused to allow Graham access.

      The officers put Graham into a patrol car but released him after an officer confirmed the convenience store was secure.

      During the encounter, officers reportedly made comments indicating they believed Graham was drunk and cursed at him. Graham reportedly suffered multiple injuries and sued the city and several officers, including Connor, for violating his constitutional rights.

      After the federal trial court granted a directed verdict [2] dismissing all defendants, plaintiff Dethorne Graham appealed to the Federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the dismissal. The United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case back to the Fourth Circuit for reconsideration of the case under a new standard for interpreting law enforcement use of force that would change the legal landscape.

      A standard to analyze police use of force

      The Graham court focused on “unreasonable seizures” and decided all LE use of force must be examined under the Fourth Amendment not the Eighth Amendment, as the latter required some inquiry into the subjective beliefs of the LEO.

      The Fourth Amendment provides, in relevant part: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” This was consistent with the Court’s holding three years prior in Tennessee v. Garner, which relied primarily on the Fourth Amendment to review a LEO’s use of force on a fleeing suspect.

      The Court set out a simple standard for courts to analyze law enforcement use of force. The desired standard would be objective as the Eighth Amendment “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibition necessitated too much focus on the subjective beliefs and intentions of the involved LEOs, which may or may not have had any effect on the outcome of the encounter: [3]

      “As in other Fourth Amendment contexts, however, the ‘reasonableness’ inquiry in an excessive force case is an objective one: the question is whether the officers' actions are ‘objectively reasonable’ in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation…An officer's evil intentions will not make a Fourth Amendment violation out of an objectively reasonable use of force; nor will an officer's good intentions make an objectively unreasonable use of force constitutional.”

      The principle is rather straightforward and generally not controversial. However, the remaining analysis sparked a fire of controversy that continues today.

      First, the Court held that the actions of a LEO must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable LEO and not a responsible person. This is significant as most criminal and civil standards incorporate and rely upon a reasonable person or “reasonable man” standard as the law once described it.

      Law enforcement critics found the seeds for their discontent in Justice Rehnquist’s rationale for this standard:

      “The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation.”

      Justice Rehnquist elaborated on the need to perform an objective analysis of the LEO’s actions that poured accelerant on the flames of controversy. Relying upon Terry v. Ohio, the Court stated:

      “Our Fourth Amendment jurisprudence has long recognized that the right to make an arrest or investigatory stop necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it.”

      Recognizing this would necessitate a fact-based inquiry, the Court provided this instruction:

      “The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.”

      Finally, the Court unequivocally advised all courts reviewing a LEO’s use of force to consider the imperfect and uncontrolled reality of the environment in which LEOs use force:

      “The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.”

      The Graham court retained one key rationale from the now overruled Johnson v. Glick case stating:

      “With respect to a claim of excessive force, the same standard of reasonableness at the moment applies: ‘Not every push or shove, even if it may later seem unnecessary in the peace of a judge's chambers,’ Johnson v. Glick, 481 F.2d, at 1033, violates the Fourth Amendment.”

      Graham has long been criticized as dismissing the rights of the subject of LE action. I believe the “reasonable LEO” standard is a thorn in the side of most LE critics who look at videos and apply an untrained, ill-informed analysis to advocate for sanctions against the LEO. Recent critics of Graham have argued that the Supreme Court’s rationale and guidance from this civil case cannot be applied to a criminal analysis of a LEO’s use of force. For those critics, I have a question: How can a reasonable use of force under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution violate a state criminal statute? I have yet to hear a coherent or rational answer.

      Graham v. Connor considers the interests of three key stakeholders – the law-abiding public who has a right to move about unrestricted, the government that has a right to enforce its laws, and the LEO who has an obligation to enforce the law and the right to do so without suffering injury. LEOs should know and embrace Graham. Time and again, the United States Supreme Court has demonstrated a clear recognition of the dangers inherent in the LEO’s duties, as well as their role in a peaceful society.

      Critics may scream louder than our supporters. Recent efforts in California and other states to change the analysis of a LEO’s use of force to apply a hindsight analysis are prime examples. However, the solid bedrock of Graham v. Connor provides a strong foundation for LEOs doing the work few in society are willing to do.

    • 05/30/2019 10:03 PM | Troy Mondine (Administrator)

       TCOLE #3305

      Collaborative Training for Police, Fire, and EMS



      HOST:                 Georgetown Police Department

      LOCATION:        Georgetown Public Safety Operations                                      & Training Center
                                  3500 DB Wood Road                                                                Georgetown, TX 78628

      DATE:                 July 22-23, 2019 ♦ 8 a.m. – 5 p.m.

      What's your response plan as a community? Are you prepared?
      This program is for Police, Fire, and EMS to train and prepare together BEFORE it happens!

      Mass Casualty Active Threat Incidents have become part of American consciousness. As guardians of the community, it's critical that fire, police, and EMS have a collaborative strategy in place. This strategy should execute sound tactical responses, focused on rapid and dynamic engagement to neutralize the threat, minimize casualties, and provide immediate medical care to the victims. That starts with this course!


      Lives depend on collaborative leadership and teamwork between police, fire, and EMS. This seminar will identify the core, time sensitive responsibilities required to rapidly implement unified command, security, of the casualty collection point and rescue task force tactics.


      Using FBI Statistics, case studies, and extensive research, Calibre has developed a 'best practice' model which will be given to each student. This model is designed to assist an agency/community in the development and implementation of a Unified Command Policy. We need to be trained and ready for anyone, anywhere, any day, for any reason.


      The course includes a FREE manual with recommended "best practices" for an active threat.


      Course topics include:


      Working as a Team Saves Lives!
      The Four A's of the Initial Responder
      Tactical Command, Communication, and Coordination
      Defining: Unified Command
      Leadership in a Volatile and Evolving Environment
      Developing a More Focused Training Program
      Protocol, Protocol, Protocol - Train, Train Train!
      Building a Community Response Attitude
      Rescue Task Force: Quick Assessment, Evacuation, and Rapid Transport
      The Aftermath: Media, Community, and Decompression


      Calibre Press Newsline
      Click here to read and subscribe to our newsline


      REGISTER ONLINE @ calibrepress.com


      Single Registration: $349
      Groups of 3+: $329 per person (use discount code AAA20)
      Groups of 6+: $309 per person (use discount code AAA40)

      For more information or to register a larger group, please contact    Kelsey Arnold:(630) 730-2724 or kelsey@calibrepress.com

    • 05/30/2019 9:57 PM | Troy Mondine (Administrator)

      June Classes Coming to a City Near You!

      Don't forget to take a look online at our other summer classes.

      You can also request to host a class at your department!

      Mastering Leadership Skills and Officer Performance

      Georgetown, TX

      June 10-12



      School Violence, Safety and Security Conference

      New Braunfels, TX

      June 17-19



      Hands-On Electrical Fire and Arson Investigation

      Fort Worth, TX

      June 25-27



      Facebook Twitter Instagram

      Public Agency Training Council

      5235 Decatur Blvd Indianapolis, Indiana 46241


      Email: questions@patc.com

      Call: 800.365.0119

    • 03/14/2019 9:27 PM | Brandon Ledbetter (Administrator)


      Our New Website and New Membership software database is currently under construction. Please pardon our mess as we are still replacing our fillers with our current information.

    • 03/06/2019 3:43 PM | Brandon Ledbetter (Administrator)

      Local Charters for TSPA have been formed at UT Southwestern and UT Houston! 

      We are currently in the process of creating and issuing local charters at all campuses where TSPA is represented. Since TSPA is spread throughout the State of Texas, this process will take some time, but we will get it done. Local charters will better allow TSPA to represent the specific department and enable the local membership to target specific items that need to be addressed.

      Please send us an e-mail if you are interested in a position as a local board member of the local charter.

    << First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 

    Call or E-mail Us:
    Office: (214) 244-7278
    E-mail: General@myTSPA.org

    P.O. BOX 195381
    Dallas, Texas 75219

    Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software