Comments on: After Horrific Murders, Lawsuit Targets Delay

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:18:13 +0000

Rebekah, I believe they are blaming the dispatchers for not picking up on the guy stating “I told y’all to quit f***ing with me.” which they say can be heard in the initial call, and the lack of information provided regarding previous incidents at that address. I know we provide officer’s information regarding pervious calls to addresses. It seems that some crucial information was left out regarding this call that may have alerted the officer’s to a more dire situation. I don’t beleive they should not hold the officer’s accountable but there were errors made by dispatch.

By: Rebekah

Rebekah — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:34:17 +0000

As a trained TC with several years experience I respect the idea that there is always something to be learned from these incidents. Its unfortuante that it takes stories such as this to create further education training and understanding of Telecommuncations. However, TC’s are trained to go with thier gut instinct, just as officers are. I often notate in CAD “child playing on the phone”. However if I hear anything that doesnt sound proper I also notate that. If ever I hear what I may even think of as distress I notate exactly what it was, often times playing the recording back (sometimes even for co-workers) to ensure I have heard it correctly. I am certain that any TC’s involved will suffer greater than anything a center/lawsuit could do to them. I still believe it was on the hands of the responding officers to make entry. They are still the ones on scene, not us. Our calls may only last seconds however they were there, and they also heard distress coming from the house.
I dont disagree that TC’s get VERY busy at times and perhaps this TC should have looked at call history for the house (as I always check for a 911 hang up call). But I still feel as if the punishment they will receive from the lawsuit will not match what they feel at this moment.

By: Gary Allen

Gary Allen — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 20:08:58 +0000

Shortly after the incident, the family stated its intention to file a lawsuit that included naming the handling calltaker. However, the actual lawsuit mentions various DC officials and police officers (as John Doe’s), but does not mention the dispatcher. Even so, several sections of the lawsuit mention mishandling of the 911 call, primarily including the “possibly playing” remark in the CAD comments. The family believes that phrase misled the officers, who may have used that bit of information to make their decision not to immediately enter the apartment. One has to question exactly what value the phrase “possibly playing” has as a CAD comment. It is too vague and too uncertain to make a real judgement on what action to take. More valuable would be including an exact description of what the calltaker heard, such as, “Sound of person yelling” or “Whisper of word ‘help.'” Typing in assumptions or conclusions can only result in a wrong decision.

By: REBEKAH

REBEKAH — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 17:21:24 +0000

I’m not sure how I understand this is the TC’s fault. If the call was dipatched and turned over to LEO than how is the dispatch center held responsible for the outcome? It is becoming a common issue to blame dispatch for the outcome of “bad” calls. However people tend to forget we are at times just the messenger. We are only as good as the inforamtion given to us and cannot make an officer go and take a call. If the officer’s responded and clearly heard something that did not sound correct they should be the ones held responsible for the outcome.
I dont want to see any officer loose thier job (As I am very protective over all of my units) however it does not sound like this should fall on dispatch.
If protocol was followed and the TC at least attempted contact back with the caller and than dispatched the call to a unit than they have done all they can do and should not be held liable.

By: Anon Coward

Anon Coward — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:07:39 +0000

Tragic situation. Very sad all around.