Anchorage Police Officer Found To Be An Illegal Immigrant

[PiKA2001]

http://www.adn.com/2011/04/22/182360...restedcop.html

At a news conference Friday, U.S. Attorney Karen Loeffler said that patrolman Rafael Espinoza, on the Anchorage police force for about six years, was really Rafael Mora-Lopez, a Mexican national working in the United States illegally.

The man known as Officer Espinoza -- Mora-Lopez, in reality -- was an excellent employee, Police Chief Mark Mew said. The investigation has so far not turned up any information that Mora-Lopez was involved in any other criminal activity outside the case announced Friday, Mew said.

"His problem was he lied his way into the job," Mew said.

The identity swap was discovered when the police officer applied for a U.S. passport in January and officials from the State Department found that the Rafael Espinoza identity he was using was actually another person, a U.S. citizen in the Lower 48, Loeffler said.

It's pretty weak that it was the State Dept that found this out and not Anchorage PD Internal Affairs Office or whoever handles their background investigations.

Part of the ongoing investigation will look into how the Mexican national slipped through the screening process for Anchorage police officers, Mew said. For example, officers must pass a lie-detector test during the interview process, Mew said.

"As part of that, do you ask them their name?" a reporter asked Mew.

"He obviously got through the polygraph," Mew said. "I can tell you what we generally ask, but what's at issue is what did we ask on that day, in that interview, and we haven't gotten to that yet."

I'm against using pre-employment polygraphs as a replacement for a thorough background investigation. You can lie through your teeth and pass a poly and you can tell the complete and honest truth yet fail a poly. I will say that polygraphs are useful for interrogation purposes but not in cases of playing 20 questions with random people who haven't committed any crimes (that you know of). This is the second case I've read about in the last month where a polygraph passing corrupt or dirty cop gets caught for something that a thorough background investigator would have discovered during a pre-employment investigation.

[Senusret I]

This is not a big deal to me.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

This is not a big deal to me.

I wouldn't use the word 'corrupt' here either.

[DrPhil]

An illegal immigrant stealing someone else's identity and becoming a police officer isn't a big deal and corrupt? Yikes.

I'm glad they caught this and this is under investigation.

[Drolefille]

It's illegal, which is not the same thing as corrupt. A politician who speeds and breaks the law isn't corrupt, but one who accepts bribes is.

He shouldn't have been doing it, but it's not shocking, scary, or anything like that, not to me. Barring further discoveries, he's been doing his job. It's a shame and reflects our shitty immigration policies. The guy, taken at face value, was proud of being a police officer and serving the community. While it's possibly he's a lying liar about everything, it's unlikely.

Oh and don't read the comments. Gabriel's GIFT is in full force.

[DrPhil]

LOL. Since we're doing the illegal vs. corrupt lesson:

The corruption could be on the part of the police department which is why there is an investigation.

The illegal is on the part of the illegal immigrant who stole someone else's identity. Both against the law. Thank goodness, being a good employee isn't enough to buffer the effects of that.

The wonderful thing about laws and procedures is that they don't wait for everyone to find something shocking, scary, or anything like that. Life would be chaotic. I know that's not what you're suggesting but it is quite possible to see why something is considered serious in a larger sense even if you don't personally find it to be a big deal.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

LOL. Since we're doing the illegal vs. corrupt lesson:

The corruption could be on the part of the police department which is why there is an investigation.

The illegal is on the part of the illegal immigrant who stole someone else's identity. Both against the law. Thank goodness, being a good employee isn't enough to buffer the effects of that.

The wonderful thing about laws and procedures is that they don't wait for everyone to find something shocking, scary, or anything like that. Life would be chaotic.

PIKA called him a corrupt cop, that's what I was referring to.
And yes, it was illegal, it just wasn't corrupt.

People get arrested all the time, whoopie, but this isn't something worth getting worked up over for me. Obviously YMMV, but your last paragraph is a straw man.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

PIKA called him a corrupt cop, that's what I was referring to.
And yes, it was illegal, it just wasn't corrupt.

Corrupt cop is someone who uses being a police officer for some illegal gain. In that sense, I agree with you because this person was corrupt before becoming an officer and was actually a good officer. Funny how that works.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Obviously YMMV, but your last paragraph is a straw man.

I don't know what YMMV means but I know my last paragraph is not what you were implying. You always catch me mid-edit.

[PiKA2001]

Was he corrupt in the terms of a politician accepting a bribe... No, but that doesn't mean that the LEO community doesn't see this guy as being a corrupt/dirty cop. In this case I think people need to get past their knee jerk reaction when the topic of immigration comes up and actually think about what this guy did to get his little position of authority. Think about it.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Corrupt cop is someone who uses being a police officer for some illegal gain. In that sense, I agree with you because this person was corrupt before becoming an officer and was actually a good officer. Funny how that works.

I just don't see that the word corruption applies here. My clients aren't corrupt, they're felons, they do illegal things, but they're not corrupt.

I don't know what YMMV means but I know my last paragraph is not what you were implying. You always catch me mid-edit.

Edit faster! YMMV= Your Mileage May Vary. This doesn't shock me, it might shock you. And yeah pre-edit it seemed like a straw man, I see what you mean now.

Yeah the police dept probably wants to get on that and figure out where it fucked up. But the guy? Eh.

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

Was he corrupt in the terms of a politician accepting a bribe... No, but that doesn't mean that the LEO community doesn't see this guy as being a corrupt/dirty cop. In this case I think people need to get past their knee jerk reaction when the topic of immigration comes up and actually think about what this guy did to get his little position of authority. Think about it.

Did he take the identity to get the job or was he living with the identity prior to getting the job. It's not clear from the article and you're assuming the former unless you have more information from somewhere.

Also I think general apathy is the exact opposite of a kneejerk reaction. And I'd rather the LEO community think that domestic abusers are dirty cops, myself. But they seem to get a pass. (Hell, LEO get a pass on a LOT of things, we have apparently found the end of the thin blue line. /snark) That's just not what corruption means.

Look I say this as someone who generally feels that police officers should be held to a HIGHER standard than the average citizen, but the only damn I give is that the city should fix its hiring practices (although whether an investigator is actually the best answer or not I don't know. What's the gold standard, what's cost effective, etc.).

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

This doesn't shock me, it might shock you

Illegality and criminality don't shock me, even when they are the most heinous forms of illegality and criminality that shock a nation.

I still don't see why whether you are personally shocked is an important point for you to continue to make.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Did he take the identity to get the job or was he living with the identity prior to getting the job.

Are you just looking for details or do you find a substantial legal or moral difference between the two?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Criminality doesn't shock me, even when it's the most heinous forms of criminality that shock a nation. I still don't see why whether you are personally shocked is an important point for you to continue to make.

Relates to whether I'm supposed to set aside my kneejerk reactions or something along those lines. I was simply clarifying what YMMV meant in context.

Are you just looking for details or do you find a substantial legal or moral difference between the two?

Responding to

think about what this guy did to get his little position of authority. Think about it.

There's a premise being assumed here that isn't supported.
I'm less concerned about someone using an identity to live than I am about someone using an identity for the purpose of becoming a police officer, I see an ethical difference between the two in terms of intent. I haven't the foggiest if there's a legal difference between the two.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

There's a premise being assumed here that isn't supported.
I'm less concerned about someone using an identity to live than I am about someone using an identity for the purpose of becoming a police officer, I see an ethical difference between the two in terms of intent. I haven't the foggiest if there's a legal difference between the two.

I don't really care about the intent at this point because he DID use the stolen identity to get himself a position as an officer. I also don't find this shocking, (I actually LOL'ed when I saw the headline) but after reading the details I found his deceit troubling and mildly disturbing. I caught the fact that he had lied about his age. I'm not familiar with Anchorage PD requirements but the "industry standard" for new recruits is for them to be under 41 years of age (some will waive this if you have prior military or LE experience). This guy was really 45 when he was hired. I can only imagine the additional lies this guy put down in his application package regarding education, experience, etc. I mean, if you're going to steal someone's identity in order to fraudulently obtain a passport than printing out a fake diploma shouldn't be beneath you.

What really bothers me is that this could happen. If this guy could do it, who's to say that a real "bad guy" couldn't pull off the same thing?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

I don't really care about the intent at this point because he DID use the stolen identity to get himself a position as an officer. I also don't find this shocking, (I actually LOL'ed when I saw the headline) but after reading the details I found his deceit troubling and mildly disturbing. I caught the fact that he had lied about his age. I'm not familiar with Anchorage PD requirements but the "industry standard" for new recruits is for them to be under 41 years of age (some will waive this if you have prior military or LE experience). This guy was really 45 when he was hired. I can only imagine the additional lies this guy put down in his application package regarding education, experience, etc. I mean, if you're going to steal someone's identity in order to fraudulently obtain a passport than printing out a fake diploma shouldn't be beneath you.

What really bothers me is that this could happen. If this guy could do it, who's to say that a real "bad guy" couldn't pull off the same thing?

Intent matters to me. I'll withhold additional 'judgment' on the individual until there's evidence of all your other suppositions. Not that my judgment counts for shit, but whatever.

And odds are, a real "bad guy" would have thrown off a lot more red flags, or you know, any red flags since this guy didn't apparently throw any. I'm fully in agreement that the system should be looked at, but against the idea of sweeping changes based on a single case unless the investigation identifies systemic flaws. Reactionary moves aren't nearly as effective as well planned, rational ones.

/I generally agree with you here if that's not clear, just not in a run around screaming about illegals way that the commenters on that news article are.