|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
GA: Savannah Looks To Avoid Paying Convicted Police Chief's Pension
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"Savannah city officials are asking Georgia’s Attorney General to weigh in on whether the city can revoke some or all of former Savannah-Chatham Metropolitan Police Chief Willie Lovett’s pension.
Lovett has been sentenced to more than seven years in prison after being convicted of gambling and other federal corruption charges stemming from his time as chief. But he’ll still collect his $130,000 annual city pension."
"At a city council work session on Thursday, City Attorney Brooks Stillwell said the city can’t change that under state law." ... |
| Comment by:
xqqme
(3/3/2015)
|
The time to act is in the penalty phase of the criminal prosecution... if a criminal uses an official position, such as a police chief job, to further a criminal enterprise, then ask for forfeiture of some of the assets "earned" through the criminal activity.
However, once the criminal prosecution is over and the punishment meted out, you can't go back and get another bite at that apple. |
| Comment by:
jac
(3/3/2015)
|
| At the very least, they should garnish his pension to pay the cost of his incarceration. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
