Officer Rivieri on YouTube and loss of job and pension.

Dear Editor, (The Sun)

While I do not know Officer Rivieri, I have to agree with your Dan Rodricks (Dixon and the cop: a troubling double standard, Sept 2, 2010) that the punishment does not seem to fit the crime. A loss of career and pension resulting from an over the top attempt at scaring a young man straight is excessive especially given the example of the ex-mayor. Perhaps the colloquial use of the word “dude,” pushed the wrong button, but the young man involve certainly appeared disrespectful.

One point that I feel is missing in this discussion appeared in Saturday’s paper in its update concerning the Harford County policeman, Officer Uhler and the pending wire-tapping case of Mr. Anthony Graber (Judge to rule on videotaping charge, Sept 4, 2010.) Like Officer Uhler, I doubt that Officer Rivieri consented to having his voice recorded for that now famous YouTube video. I wonder why the city prosecutors did not press charges against the individual who made the recording as was done in Harford County by State’s Attorney Joseph I. Cassilly. Could it be that they do not feel a Baltimore City officer’s right to privacy is as important as it might be in Harford County? Or, is it that the captured sequence is an example of the very reason why a citizen should be able to fully record such exchanges? (The words “fully record” are important to both sides of any such issue.) I don’t know why charges were not pursued, but this and the above dismissal should cause other Baltimore City officers some sleepless nights.

Given the situation, I hope that Officer Rivieri’s case is reconsidered and that at a minimum he is given his pension which he obviously earned prior to the incident. (Perhaps he has some sort of civil action available to him with respect to the unauthorized recording.)

Edward Crook,

Timonium,

410-560-1855