Professional courtesy… or double standard?

A few days ago, Deputy Bobby Jones was caught committing a crime of dating violence in downtown Melbourne. Scott Damsgaard, a witness who had heard the victim screaming from a block away, approached and observed the battery in progress. When he tried to intervene, Bobby Jones allegedly told him: “You need to stand back or I'll kill you. I'll fuck you up."

No charge has been filed, and Jones was not even arrested. Melbourne police allegedly said they have not arrested Jones because the State Attorney's Office needs to look at the evidence first. When did that new policy come about? Or is it a policy which only applies to coppers? With this evidence at hand, any regular citizen would have been arrested immediately and brought to Sharpes with no bond prior to his first court appearance. What’s going on? What is with the double standard?

Now, five days later, another Cocoa off duty cop, Roney M. Daniel, was observed by third party witnesses assaulting another driver with a firearm in Palm Bay. He then crashed his car. The crash investigation resulted in his arrest for two counts of misdemeanor DUI. However, the Palm Bay police never charged him with the serious felony witnesses observed him committing when he was (while off duty and allegedly drunk) chasing another motorist, and pointing his personal gun out of the window. Will the State Attorney's Office correct that wrong? I doubt it.

He was released from the jail on $1,000.00 bond. Any other regular schmuck would have been charged with a second degree felony; aggravated assault with a firearm, which carries a minimum mandatory sentence of three years in prison.

What the fuck is going on? I am sure the honest cops I know are wondering, as I do, how these things can happen. Twice in a week, two large police departments, Melbourne and Palm Bay are blatantly showing they can’t be trusted, because they failed their mandate to equally apply the law when the defendant is a colleague from a neighboring department. 

The public should demand some explanation as to how these departments can apply different standards with impunity when it comes to make charging decisions against other law enforcement officers. The public should also be told who, in both cases, were the highest in the chain of command that made these decisions.