officer Lui

Another heart-breaking funeral is underway.  Officer Liu’s father spoke in Cantonese.  It was soul crushing even though I don’t understand Cantonese.  Officer Liu was an only son.  His wife also gave a beautiful tribute to her husband.  It was full of love and friendship and honor.  I felt like I knew this slain man personally as I listened to her words.

 

Jet Blue donated 1,100 seats to officers from around the country to come to NYC to honor this officer.  The streets were lined with blue as far as the eye could see.  Tens of thousands of officers were out there to show respect to the fallen officer.  The officers in front of the funeral home did not turn their backs on DeBlasio, who also spoke.  However, down the street, a large contingent of officers did turn their backs, even though they had been asked to be respectful by their CEO, NYPD Commissioner Bratton.  Some of those who turned their backs were from out of town.



The Mayor, regardless of the person, is the commander-in-chief of the police force.  The commissioner is the general.  A similar comparison would be if soldiers had turned their backs on FDR and disregarded the words of General Eisenhower.  It just shouldn’t be done.  Now is  a time to grieve.   Grievances should be addressed after the two officers have both been lain to rest.  A funeral isn’t the time nor the place.

Those who turned their backs on the Mayor were wrong.  They broke protocol and they gave ammunition to their critics.  Those who broke protocol sent a strong message that they didn’t have to go by the rules.  That is exactly the message they do NOT need to be sending.

RIP Officers Liu and Ramos.  RIP.

36 Thoughts to “Officer Liu’s funeral: A time for grieving, not grievance”

  1. Starryflights

    The officers who turned their backs should be fired. This is disrespectful to the officer whose funeral these officers were attending. The public gets it, oksy, New York police don’t care for the mayor.

  2. Emma

    @Starryflights Were you ok with 25 NY City Council members–we’re talking elected officials– staging a “die-in” on the steps of City Hall, then marching into the street, blocking traffic and chanting before going into City Hall to do the people’s business?

    Just curious.

    1. I know you didn’t ask me but I was not OK with it. However, I didn’t elect any of them so I shrugged it off. I just thought it was a knee jerk emotional reaction.

      It is different from the cop situation. It doesn’t involve the chain of command. That is my only reason for objecting to them turning their backs.

  3. Pat.Herve

    The NYCPD is taking this too far – and will do damage to their own organization. Even the NY Post – a big NYCPD supporter – is saying that. DeBlasio did campaign on ending the stop-and-frisk policy allows officers to pick a person and stop them, frisk them and arrest for cause. Should an officer be able to frisk one for no reason?

    1. I think they have taken it too far. I can’t get past the concept of chain of command. They are damaging their brand. I am a big cop supporter and it is rapidly dwindling as far as the NYPD goes. They are sending a signal that they really don’t have to do what they are told to do.

  4. blue

    @Moon-howler

    Chain of command? So I quess you mean that when a civilian political appointee tells the police to not turn their backs on a disrespectful Mayor so as to protect that Mayor from further political controversey or embarassment in front of the TV cameras, a Mayor who has yet to apologize for his lack of support – that is ok? I think that is worse and much, much more dangerous.

    No, they are not damaging their brand, they are defending it and respecting it in really the only way they have to do so, given the deep seated pain he – and otherr politicos – have caused them and the people of NY.

    1. How can you say they are not damaging their brand when many many cop supporters think they are out of line? It sends a strong message that those LEOs think they can do what they want to and ignore their boss. Seriously. What world do you live in? That civilian appointee is their freaking boss. He is also a former cop. This is his second tour of duty as the commissioner, under different administrations. That is simply the hierarchy of the NYPD.

      They need to do what their boss tells them to do. Period. You sound like some sort of anarchist.

      FYI–most NYPD cops have no problem with Bratton. He is respected.

  5. Ed Myers

    They can protest on TV by coming in civilian clothes. When they come to a protest with the government uniform they are communicating the government message. No organization allows that kind of insubordination and police are particularly angry when the public is equally dismissive of their authority and they respond harshly. I would fine each patrolman 2 days wages.

    1. I agree with Ed. Protest in civilian clothes. I don’t have a problem with that at all. It also is insubordination.

  6. blue

    Bratton is a putz, a political tool doing as commanded for purely political purposes. He knows he has lost their respect too. This has nothing to do with Chain of Command. And whether in uniform or not, at a funeral of a brother, you bet they have a right to quietly and respectfully demonstrate their distain under the 1st Amendment. If you think their turning their back on that AH damages the Department you are part of the problem. And no I do not think many officers support the Mayor, you are just making that up. There are those who chose not to demonstrate and that is their right, but you can bet they get it.

  7. Scout

    @ Blue; what exactly did De Blasio do for which he needs to apologize? You mention “lack of support”. Does that mean he should not have expressed public concern about the Garner death? Does that mean he should have caved on the contract negotiations? Does it mean he should not have opposed stop-and-frisk? Why is Ed’s suggestion not an appropriate way for these guys to express their grievances?

  8. blue

    Really ? You really don’t think that a Mayor who choses a factually false but politically expediant narrative over the police deserves to offer an apology? He got caught. Say I can’t breath five or six times while resisting arrest while the senior officer on the scene is black and female to boot. The first time you might buy it but these are experienced and seasoned officers – and then see how you feel when the infrastructure hangs you out to dry. The Mayor made no bones about not supporting the facts or the police and did it for the crudest of political points, undermining every officer, putting every officer at greater risk, putting the taxpayers at greater risk from more and more stupid lawsuits for every police action.

    We can disagree abouty stop and frisk and about profiling, but there is no question that it works, crime is down – Big time, just as 3 times and your out has and you can thank the Mayor for the end of that, but I don’t suppose you live in NY anyway.

    I have heard the line about this being a police negotiating tactic – not even close. That too is insulting and deserves an apology – who do you think started that one?

    1. The disagreement is not over Deblasio but rather over whether uniformed cops should have turned their back on the Mayor, at a funeral.

      those other things are the problem of NY City.

  9. blue

    Nothing these officers did constituted insubordination. Legally, pursuant to Garvin v Chambers, insubordination was defined as refusal to obey some order which a superior officer is entitled to give and is entitled to have obeyed. Bratton was not so enttled at a funeral as they were for the most part off duty nor did he issue an order. He is actually smarter than that and could himself have been sued had he issued such an illegal order. He made a political request. Its a shame he did not stand with the officers or otherwise resign.

    1. Being in uniform entitles Britton to make any statement about behavior he wants. Being a cop carries with it responsibility for behavior 24 hours a day. There is no 9-5 behavior and then you are off the clock.

      He asked them not to do it. The didn’t comply. Deblasio is their commander-in-chief. Obama is the military commander-in-chief. You can’t have that kind of disrespect in the ranks in either case. If you lose that discipline, you have lost your force.

      Let’s not deflect onto other issues and try to excuse this or excuse that. You either believe that military type organizations obey down the chain of command or you don’t/.

  10. Wolve

    Those cops are now targets for every nut in the land with a grievance against law enforcement. Let then grieve for their murdered comrades in their own way. Maybe De Blasio will learn something from this episode about how to be a “commander-in-chief.”

    1. The cause/effect you have apparently assigned is simply not verifiable. DeBlasio isn’t making wackos shoot cops. While you might not like some of his remarks, those remarks didn’t cause the shooting deaths.

      Cops are targets for every nut in the land on a daily basis. That is the nature of being a cop. Would you allow the military to show disrespect to any commander in chief, or would you say it was ok to diss Obama but they had better tow the line for one of the Bush presidents? I say that kind of disrespect and break in discipline is wrong regardless of who is their commander in chief. THAT is what makes a weak disciplinary force. You can’t pick and chose your leaders as a cop or as a soldier. You serve and obey. Snort! Cherry picking!

  11. Scout

    My question to Blue can be re-phrased this way – If you were to draft De Blasio’s apology, how would you phrase it? That might help me understand why he thinks this is a problem entirely placed on the Mayor’s shoulders.

    By the way, I have great respect for NYPD and sympathy for the patrolmen who were murdered. On the other hand, as a connoisseur of rhetorical excess and how, in our times, it becomes its own story, I am skeptical that all the vitriol and animus between the Patrolmen’s union and the Mayor is justified or unavoidable. To me, the core stimulus for things having gotten to where they are is the insane statement that the blood of Officers Liu and Ramos was on the Mayor’s hands. Up to that point, the tensions were manifestations of the intrinsic dysfunction of New York City’s government. From that point forward, we were looking at something much more sinister.

    1. I do not disagree. Thanks for pointing that out, Scout. That “blood on the Mayor’s hands” was a terrible statement to make and also false.

  12. Scout

    PS @ Blue – I doubt that we disagree on Stop-and-Frisk. It’s a very radical leftist, anti-constitutional police method. I don’t generally think of you espousing left-wing, anti-Constitutional positions. While labels these days are pretty well degraded of meaning, I think you probably at least self-identify as a “conservative.” If so, you join me in opposing stop-and-frisk.

  13. Ed Myers

    Police can grieve by shutting down traffic and diss’n the man, but don’t let those civilians try grieving for their murdered brothers…Bring out the big guns and whoop their asses. The government belongs to the police and if voters don’t respect that and cooperate by electing the police union favorite for mayor expect trouble in the street. If this were a third world country this would be the beginning of the coup that replaces the mayor with a police junta.

    1. That is certainly not being espoused on this blog by the management, just to be clear.

      I don’t like what the union bosses are saying and to suggest that the Mayor has blood on his hands is absurd.

  14. Pat.Herve

    blue :
    they were for the most part off duty

    NYPD Officers are on duty when attending a funeral – and are paid.

    1. I did not know that. However, my position doesn’t change. It was simply reinforced. Anyone wearing a uniform in that setting is representing the NYPD and should be on their best behavior.

  15. blue

    @ Scout

    Well, he could quickly start by suggesting that it was a mistake to order the NYPD to stand down and allow a great deal of unlawfullness by protesters – impacting perhaps millions – and that he did not intend to suggest he was siding with the protesters, their misrepresentation of the facts – to include the suggestion that the Grand Jury must have been in error – or that the larger body of the NYPD was racist. He could then suggest that he mis-spoke when he told about telling his son to be extra careful around the NYPD because he is black – rather than use it as an example of a conversation that every father has about how to deal with the police. He should admit and apologize for going way to far and should not have inserted the suggestion of NYPD racism in that conversation. He could then say he made a mistake by not condeming straight away the NYC councilwoman who wore the “I can’t breath” t-shirt as inappropriate and unhelpful. And he should say something to counter the impression that he has demeaned the NYPD by using them and by buying into the national rhetoric for purely political gains. That would be a good start.

    With respect to stop and frisk, yes we agree that there is a delicate balance between crime control with reasonable suspician and totalitarianism. My father used to say if you want to be treated like a hood or a druggy, dress like one, but do not be surprised by the result. I would be more interested in the potocols the police have to justify a stop and frisk and how the courts have reacted before fully banning them. But it has made these high crime areas safer – no debate on that, which I guess is something all socialist states can lay claim to. And remember the rules are a bit different for those on probation anyway as many of these stops are in the areas were this is prevelent. And you are right I do have constitional concerns, my daugther was stopped and almost automatically asked by the Va trooper if he could search her car. She locked the car and said my father said not to allow it on principle and that we would deal with probable cause later. He backed off. The Supreme Court has allowed this waiver of your right against an unreasonable search and siezure (a warrant) – even for minors.

  16. blue

    @Pat.Herve

    Like the military all NYPD are on duty 24-7, so whats your point, that they they should not have attended the funeral in uniorm? Were any of them at roll-call that morning – No , were they abandoning their duty – No. Would their demonstration have been as effective if not in uniform – No. Would that have made life easier for the Mayor – yes. Oh, I get your point and it appears that you are more than willing to take their 1st Amendment right to political speech away from them if they identify themselves as NYPD. Now that is a very slippery slope – even for a progressive.

  17. Pat.Herve

    @blue
    You said they were off duty – they were not.

    If I am in my employers uniform – Yes, I do give up my 1st amendment rights to political speech and am expected to enforce their wish. In my own clothes, I can do what I want.

    They are pushing it too far.

  18. blue

    @Pat.Herve

    Thank you for your opinion. It is true, as I noted above, that individuals employed as police officers typically carry their police powers with them 24 hours a day in their jurisdiction. This is not, however, the same thing as being on duty 24/7 even though they retain the power to arrest, use force, and the power to shoot 24/7. I do not know how many officers were assigned to the precinct that the funeral was in – do you? When off -duty, NYPD allows officers to be in uniform and to hire out to private firms in uniform to perform security work. This means that many times individuals perceive these cops as being on duty even though they are working private jobs. They do not give up their 1st Amendment rights off duty in uniform either.

    So, what are you saying that the officers attending the funeral were on shift / on duty and abandoned their posts, because if you are and have any proof of that then yes there could and should be actions taken. But that is not the case or this Mayor would have acted to assauge his weak ego.

  19. Ed Myers

    “if you want to be treated like a hood or a druggy, dress like one”

    This is prejudice based on culture and highly correlated with skin color. This is what minorities see as harassment….harsh treatment by police without cause. Or maybe the cause is retaliation for exercising their 1A rights to dress the way they want.

  20. blue

    Grow up Eddy, It was the 60’s and 70’s and a hood had a different 50’s meaning just like druggy and hippie did. It was good advice then and it remains so today.

  21. Emma

    @Ed Myers “but don’t let those civilians try grieving for their murdered brothers…Bring out the big guns and whoop their asses.”

    So is looting and fire setting now an acceptable form of “grieving”?

    It’s really hard to keep up with your rulebook.

  22. Ed Myers

    @emma
    … looting and arson is no more acceptable than police killing people unnecessarily. The looting and arson were done by criminals who took advantage of the opportunity. Tarring all protesters as criminals is no more acceptable than claiming all police are murderers and racists. We can see as many bad cops as we do bad protesters. The rulebook is the same: grieving should not include criminal behavior but discretion should be used such that harsh application of misdemeanor laws such as littering and jaywalking aren’t used to chill political speech.

  23. Ed Myers

    The police uniform gives the police officer certain privileges such as the expectation that others will cooperate and respect commands under threat of arrest for disorderly conduct. That is incompatible with a free speech model where civilians are able to express opposition to another’s viewpoint or walk away. Police can’t demand that we listen to them when they are engaged in political speech. If they want to engage in protest they have to do it out of uniform so we know it is private speech and can treat it as such and not be forced to respect it as government speech. What some NYC police seem to want is a martial law scenario where the only people allowed to engage in political speech are the police.

  24. middleman

    What some are missing is that the mayor of any city is supposed to be the mayor of ALL the citizens in that jurisdiction. There were thousands of protestors in NY, most of them nonviolent. Many, many (if not most) of the minority group members in NY that didn’t join the protestors feel much the same way as the protestors regarding police abuse. For the mayor to ignore those constituents and blindly succumb to the radical police element would obviously be wrong and a dereliction of his duty to the citizens of NYC.

    The mayor has nothing to “apologize” for. What he stated regarding some officer’s behavior is real and felt by Americans of color across the country. To think otherwise is to be in denial of American history. To give in to the disrespectful and insubordinate behavior of the relatively small number of officers will only further delay the dialogue and changes that need to come to address the ongoing police-related problems across the country.

    We HAVE to address this unless we want to continue to travel backwards in racial relations in this country and add police abuses to voting abuses, sentencing abuses, lending abuses and economic unfairness on the list of issues that prevent us from moving towards real equality and a homogenous society.

  25. Cargosquid

    @Ed Myers
    They have every right to dress as they wish.

    If you dress like people that are known to commit crimes, expect to be treated as such.

    Your clothes are your first point of identification. You have the right to dress that way. You have a responsibility not to be considered part of the problem. By dressing that way, one allows the actual criminals to hide.

    Don’t want to be treated like a criminal, then don’t ACT like a criminal.

    That said, RACIAL profiling…such as stopping a car for “driving while black” is wrong. I’ve actually been in a car while that happened.

    ACTIONS and APPEARANCES count. The problem is that the communities tolerate and promote “gangsta” culture.

Comments are closed.