Comments for Dispatch Magazine On-Line

Comment on Center Defends 911 Call—BOLO Only by Gary Allen

Gary Allen — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 20:52:15 +0000

The local newspaper has now posted a story with quotes from the dispatcher who handled the initial call. The Murray County 911 director also says she followed their procedures when handling the call. Surf – http://bit.ly/9CCgLt

Comment on Center Defends 911 Call—BOLO Only by David

David — Sun, 05 Sep 2010 20:03:18 +0000

You’re directly on point. There is a lot of case law already established on this. The one that comes to mind is the case out of California (I want to say Los Angeles County or San Diego County Sheriff’s Office) when a woman called 911, reported that her ex-husband had made threats to come to the house and kill her. Because he was not on-scene and there was no ETA, they refused to send an officer. She and several family members were subsequently murdered. They sued and both the circut and, later, federal appeals court ruled that law enforcement agencies cannot predict crimes. All we can do is respond to legitimate calls for service, with actual perpetrators on the scene. In the interim, people have got to start taking responsibility and accountability for their own choices.

Comment on Murder Revelation: No 911 Call Follow-Up by Raymond Chiozza

Raymond Chiozza — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 14:29:32 +0000

WKNO-FM Radio in Memphis did a news story on cell phones and 911 and it is a very good piece of work. If you want to read and listen to the audio portion see the link below.

The reporter for WKNO-FM who reported wrote the article is:

Eleanor Boudreau
WKNO-FM Reporter
901.729.8746 (office)
617.785.6390 (cell)
eboudreau@wkno.org

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wkno/news.newsmain/article/0/0/1695544/Mid-South.News/The.9-1-1.Cell.Phone.Conundrum.

Thanks

Comment on Center Defends 911 Call—BOLO Only by Dispatcher

Dispatcher — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 04:06:58 +0000

The call should have been transferred to the other county, then the responsible center could talk directly to the caller. Secondly, Murray County should have told Whitfield to see the caller as well as BOLO for the vehicle. Those are two areas where it could have been better handled even if the guy never came back to murder two people. It’s ALWAYS better to talk to the original complaintant than a go between. It’s like getting a 3rd party call from a neighbor who’s other neighbor called them to say their husband is beating the kids.

Comment on Center Defends 911 Call—BOLO Only by Gary Allen

Gary Allen — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:37:27 +0000

I think one of the issues of this situation is “ownership” of the 911 call. Taking the call information and making it a BOLO might be okay for Murray County. But Whitfield County didn’t get to evaluate the call or incident for itself. Would they have decided to handle it differently if they talked directly to the caller? Somehow I have the feeling that Whitfield County is saying, “Gee. We would have liked to handle that call ourselves.”

Comment on Center Defends 911 Call—BOLO Only by John

John — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 23:32:04 +0000

Yep, exactly Anthony. It is a BOLO only absent any physical violence before he left.

Comment on Center Defends 911 Call—BOLO Only by Anthony Cathey

Anthony Cathey — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 20:17:19 +0000

A BOLO in this situation is completely satisfactory. The BOLO is based on what had happened, not what could of happened. Public Safety can’t apply the “what if” to every scenario.

Comment on Prank Call Sparks Response, Gets Personal by John

John — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:34:47 +0000

Terrible call taking….

Comment on After Shooting, Officer Demoted to Dispatcher by Seriously?

Seriously? — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 08:32:54 +0000

Soooo, a “dispatch” publication posts an article that calls or supports a dispatch position be considered a demotion. Is dispatch not a profession in its own right? Did I miss the part on the application that says it is the peon spot for those “promoting” to an officer position. Seriously????? Guess the rest of us demotees or unpromotables should go job hunting for our real career.

Comment on State’s Early Retirement Plan May Hit Dispatchers by Concerned

Concerned — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 05:20:19 +0000

These are SCAB Employees correct !!! Partime, NON UNION EMPLOYEES. Not only are they taking a Fulltime Employees Job from the dept there Stealing Overtime that would normally go to a Qualified Dispatcher..

Allowing The City and County to Union BUST !!!!!!

Nice BE PROUD Folks…