facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Fired Struthers cop loses bid to get job back



Published: Mon, January 14, 2013 @ 6:48 p.m.

Fired Struthers cop loses bid to get job back

struthers

A former Struthers police officer who was fired after an OVI charge has lost his bid to get his job back through arbitration.

The arbiter’s decision was released Monday in the case of Daniel Lamping, 34, a seven-year full-time member of Struthers police when he was fired July 27 for an OVI arrest in Boardman July 16.

Lamping was stopped at night on South Avenue by the Ohio State Highway Patrol because the car he was driving did not have on its headlights.

Lamping was driving the car for a friend who was intoxicated, the arbiter’s award indicates he told the city during an interview with city administrators. He told administrators July 18 he drank six beers and two shots of whiskey from 6 to 10:15 p.m. before the 11:15 p.m. traffic stop, while working on a house he’d recently bought.

The arbiter’s decision also indicates Lamping let the friend drive his own car until he noticed him weaving behind him. He drove the friend’s car while his wife drove their truck, the document says.

When the trooper pulled Lamping over, he refused field sobriety tests, indicated that he “worked for the city of Struthers” and told the trooper he’d had only two beers, the report says. He was arrested and ultimately refused a breath test.

The city fired him based on the facts that his driver’s license had been suspended, he was uninsurable because of the test refusals, he had violated his oath of office and he was dishonest, lying to the trooper and raising questions about his ability to be honest under oath in court cases, the document says. He also allowed his friend to drive an unsafe vehicle while intoxicated, then he himself drove the unsafe vehicle, the document says.

The city also contended that Lamping tried to use his position as a police officer to persuade the trooper not to charge him. The arbiter decided there was not enough evidence to prove that.


Comments

1MLC75(529 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

This should be a lesson to all law enforcement,you are not above the law.I'm glad to see Lamping treated like a regular citizen,no favors,even though he tried to get one.

Suggest removal:

2USMC0331(150 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Exactly! Well put gdog. Most people don't lose their jobs for an OVI. How many people work the line at GM drunk? Any reason to bash a cop!

Suggest removal:

3laborlaw(5 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I will agree with those above who observe that reveling in the termination of anyone isn't something that we should be doing. However, as much as it is never something to celebrate, it appears that the right decision was made.

People do lose their jobs for OVI, insurance issues, and losing their licenses when part of their job involves driving a vehicle. People actually lose their jobs for excessive points on their license (ask any CDL holder or trucker). Comparing the fallout from an OVI for people who do not drive as part of their job vs. those who do (and have a duty to enforce the law) is an apples and oranges comparison.

It also appears from the article though that it was much more than merely a licensure issue/OVI and also involved actions that were questionable given a police officer's duty to uphold the law and be truthful.

It's a sad, unfortunate circumstance that someone has lost employment. However, under the circumstances it appears that the decision was correct.

Suggest removal:

4USMC0331(150 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I have known plenty of people who drive for part of their job that were charged with OVI. They did not lose their job. Why? Because in most circumstances the judge gives "work driving privileges". Why not in this case?

Then he admits to trying to the right thing by driving a friend. I'm sure that someone will have answers for that, they always do on here.

Did they say what his record looked like? Was this a first infraction? All they touched on was that he had seven years on the job. Cops are people too. they make mistakes. Why can't they be given second chances like all the criminals they arrest over and over?

Suggest removal:

5zebratank2006(16 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

So the officer lied to the trooper so he got fired?

Then told the truth under oath when he was in a hearing, so now they fire him because they question his ability to be under oath??? If he would have just lied under oath...then he probably wouldn't have gotten fired! He got fired because he told the TRUTH under oath! He lied to the trooper, NOT UNDER OATH!!!

WOW!!! SOOO.......if a Struthers police officer gets pulled over for speeding and then lies to the cop about how fast they were going...that means they are now subject to losing their job?? Because the mayor will now question their ability to be truthful under oath?????? Something is not right about this. I think he should have been punished, but something just doesn't add up.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport