In regards to Professors comment: I can't think of a GOOD reason to stay.
I don't think he "realllllly" wanted to stay. I think he copped (no pun intended) an attitude that well I AM going to stay because I am a cop and you can't tell me what I can and can't do. When and how all the hair pulling, slamming people to the ground and fighting began probably occurred after all that. Jason Grooms knows these people, he shoots darts with them. He KNEW that bar was closed to the public. He was trying to throw his weight around and it cost him his job, bottom line. I am sure he doesn't think it was the right decision anymore.

In the report I read, and in this paper it was grooms wife who through the first punch, or should I say, whipped somebody down by their hair.

As far as grooms not being a slease ball all I have to say is so glad he is no longer a officer in Evansville. We don't need that kind of person who is suppose to uphold the law not break it.

Something else that has bothered me about this. If I take my wife out for a good time, and walk into a bar where you are met by all 15 people or so who very directly tell you that they don't want you there, even IF the one guy (Al) said he'd pour you a drink, who the heck would want to stay (w/your back turned to most of them while you sat at the bar...)? In other words, who wants to 'socialize' at a place where everyone has made it crystal clear that THEY don't want you there? I can't think of a GOOD reason to stay.

Curtain--Well, he was the victim of the battery charge, but under the circumstances, I agree--poor choice of words for the overall purpose of the discussion. Apologies.

I'm certainly not saying he is. I don't even know the man. I've tried to keep my posts' aimed at the process and procedures. I'll leave the guilt and innocence part to the triers of fact. And I certainly know not to believe much of what is posted or printed.

Mr. Grooms may not be the monster or slease everyone has him made out to be.

So what's your point HL?

Let's go back to the night of Klub Bub's holiday party. Did Mr. Al Oleston, a patron of the party, greet the Grooms' at the door with a hug and tell them it was a "private party, you can for 1 drink and then leave"?--Then did Mr. Oleston lie to the police saying he told the Grooms' to leave immediately? Why did the bartender start getting their drinks if they had to leave? Both Ms. Lewis and Mr. White confessed they physically hit Mr. Grooms as Mr. White stated he swung wildly at Mr. Grooms hitting him 6 to 12 times in the face. (issue of Milton Courier Dec. 20th). During all this Mr. Grooms never threw a punch back to protect himself. And as far as being a janitor at Screamen Meemees-I think Jim Halbach would be a better employer than the City of Evansville.

curtaincall; What I addressed in my previous post was the question concerning other departments doing background investigations and what information would be available to them. The fact remains, any reports generated from an investigation, whether internal or criminal, must be preserved according to state statutes. What information contained in those reports is available under the freedom of information act is also governed by state statutes. Yes it does make a difference as to how the information is requested; ie a simple verbal comment / request vs a written freedom of information request.

And again, as stated in my previous post, concerning his possible hiring at another agency; information not ordinarly availabe to any citizen would be available to that agency conducting a background investigation by the simple fact that every agency I am aware of requires an applicant to sign an "authorization for release of information" form to allow such information to be released. If the applicant refused to sign such a form I can't imagine him/her getting very far in the hiring process.

Hope this help explains the process.

wisconsin heat, so what you are saying its in his records why he resigned?

So if someone asks the right questions when they ask for a ref.from Evansville they will come to know why he 'left'.

I honestly could see Mcelroy or the city of Evansville if asked ' Did he leave on good terms?'

They would say ' Yes he did to pursue other things.' They would never mention why he resigned.

Mcelroy liked him.

Two things curtaincall. "However he was given the option to 'resign' . So there was no permanent record of his misdeeds and no one could say anything because he did resign." This is just not true. If any investigation was done, either criminal or internal, there would still be a permanent record unless it was illegally destroyed. And when an agency conducts a background investigation the applicant signs a waiver to allow those records to be released to the investigating agency.

As to #2 "I am curious how he thinks he can plead not guilty as he did , and win?
He must be looking for reduced charges."
You must not be familiar with our legal system. It is very common for defendants to initially plead not guilty. This is a common procedure which basically allows for the judicial process to move along while allowing the defendant time to consult with an attorney and explore all of the options. This is usually done knowing full well they are not innocent and eventually will plead guilty to something. That's our system, like it or not.

What part of "settlement" don't some of you understand? The whole point was that the probationary period was in discrepency (if the training hours counted or not); it was cheaper to "settle" than to drag it out in court. It also allows the department to resume searching for a qualified applicant, which they can now afford rather than risking paying Grooms leave pay during a drag out with this issue. Nowhere does it state it was a "forced" resignation. The "settlement" should replace any further benefits with the department, as the article states: "settle any and all claims".

Also, my understanding of pigbrain's comment of "victim" was a comparison: "as they would drive anyone home who was drunk" rather than calling Grooms a victim.

No they did not ' have' to pay him. But is it worth the 40,000 some thousand they spend last year in a interanl investigation and citizen complaint? NO. He was no longer on probation. So the right to 'fire' during the probation period was no longer there. There was the officer who made moon shine that left the dept last year. Remember that? Earlier in the year he had been accused of trading tickets for favors?

The last placed he had been employed, as a officer he was accused of the same thing. However he was given the option to 'resign' . So there was no permanent record of his misdeeds and no one could say anything because he did resign. I actually lived in the town where this happened at the time.

Evansville is not the only town who has let bad officer's resign instead of dealing with firing them and possible grievance or appeal.

That is wrong. You are not protecting the public by doing this. There needs to be accountability.

If grooms the dog that he is goes on and gets another job in law enforcement, he will continue doing what he did. He has learned nothing.

I am hoping all the publicity from this will keep him from getting a job in this area , but people tend to forget after a while.

I am curious how he thinks he can plead not guilty as he did , and win?

He must be looking for reduced charges.

well, pigbrain, you said a mouthful! But, you forgot, they will find out what size shoe he wore in 3rd grade.

curtaincall, the detectives conducting his background (IF for some strange reason, is able to progress that far, in the hiring process of another agency) will be able to find out if he was breastfed as an infant, let alone his previous employment history.

Evansville didn't "HAVE" to pay him curtaincall. It's like many other situations and lawsuits; sometimes it's cheaper to make a nominal payment to make the problem go away than it would be to fight it. Not saying it's right but it is reality.

Also, as far as website to alert potential future employors about him, if they don't do a "thorough" background investigation then they deserve what they get.

also I want to point out , he was no longer on probation that is why Evansville had to pay him.

To Professor , you referred to the grooms as 'victims' , please don't refer to them as the 'vicitm.' They were the assailants, not the victims. Its bad enough Evansville paid him,much less him being called a victim. Maybe a victim of his own bad deeds.

I do have a question though maybe for the prof.

He it seems resigned as opposed to being fired. Which is what we were led to believe at first.

Some one please tell me he can not collect unemployment being he resigned.

Someone else told me he could, as it was considered a ' forced resignation.'

I will be sick if that clown gets any more money.

Its to bad there is not a website that can be accessed by places hiring law enforcement , that lets them know even though they may have resigned, there were issues.

grooms does not belong in law enforcement anywhere.

He shouldn't have been paid a cent.
That's okay, he'll go to another department and get hired on.

Where do you read he got his job back? He wanted to be re-instated. Instead, they paid him $5,500 and got rid of him. Oh and good riddance too!

Let me get this straight.. This officer takes his wife out, makes an as$# out of himself in public, & brings unwanted attention to his department. Breaks the law by assaulting someone & Driving Under the Influence (what was the Milton Officer thinking?). Anyways.. By strong suggestion (i assume) he resigns (as it should be). After resigning he cries foul on his forced resigning,... gets back pay AND (Did I read that right)"His Job Back?" Man!!! Aren't unions great (Sarcastic). You can be a dead beat in any profession,if your union dues are paid up & the union back's you. In the beginning Unions served a noble purpose but i think that time has long past.

Right as can be, wisconsinheat.

Bottom line is: You can do all the background investigations and all the psych. tests you want, but the human brain is such a complex thing, no one really knows or can predict what might happen in the future under any specific circumstance. I think most of us would be amazed at what each of us is capable of under the right or wrong circumstances.

Couple of quick points: First, I was able to read the report generated by Officer Smith (no, I won't reveal my source!). Grooms did not drive home; when the on-scene investigation was completed, the deputy sent to back up Officer Smith drove him home (as they would any victim). Second, I'm not sure that the "Psych. Tests" that are so much in the news these days are all that reliable. For those that don't know, "MMPI" stands for "Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory", along with its progeny, the MMPI-2 and the MMPI-A. The test itself--literally hundreds of questions like this: "I would enjoy being a florist.", or "I enjoyed reading 'Alice In Wonderland'"--where the test-taker would mark either 'tends to agree' or 'tends to disagree' or 'n/a'. These two questions are examples that purport to reveal effeminate characteristics of test-takers. Thus, it would be 'o.k.' for females to agree w/this statement, but males who agreed w/these statements would be flagged. As I recall, the tests are designed to measure/reveal 9 or 10 or so specific characteristics/traits of a test-taker's personality, which can then be measured against 'desireable' characteristics for cops (thus, an 'inventory' of this person's personality traits). There is FAR from unanimous agreement that these so called 'tools' have any value whatsoever in this regard. Most agencies don't use them to find out anything about the applicant; rather, they use them so that if an applicant passes, and later goes crazy, police administrative types can say, "wow, what a surprise; he passed the psych. test." These are NOT 'psych. tests', but rather snapshots of who--perhaps--this person is at the time he's taking the test. The public would be better served--in my opinion--by committing those resources to a more thorough background check.

That round of hiring required a psychological exam. It's in the meeting notes available online (and they require the same standards for part time officers as full time officers, btw. Their most recent hiring for a fulltime officer required a retesting phase to determine the best candidate). Wisconsin requires a "thorough psych. evaluation" for hiring, but it's nonspecific. It's arbitrary anyway; anyone actually in the field of psychology will tell you that the tests used in other states (typically the MMPI) are outdated and invalid.

I agree with pigbrain. The probationary period did its job, and weeded out a bad candidate.

Honestly I think Evansville needs to redo its entire process. Evansville has had a rep. for years of cops doing funny, sometimes unethical things. Just because they don't make the papers does not mean they don't happen. But I guess that could be said of any small town force. Look at Milton, did they or did they not allow the grooms, to drive home DRUNK? Sadly from everything that has been read it would seem as though they did.

YIKES.

Thanks PigBrain for the info. You said it best when you said:at least his true maturity level and attitude appeared early on...that's what probationary periods are for.
I am from a big city and don't really know how these small police agencies work. Like you said small towns may do things differently.
Kudos to EVPD for taking out "the trash" so to speak.

evansvillehousewife: LOL at the screamin' meemees part! I agree with what garyprimer said, which must be why the City settled this. He's the one who went berserk, then resigned from his position. What is it exactly the EPD did wrong and where does his claim to any compensation have any merit at all? While I don't know Jason Grooms, or his family, sounds like he's coo-coo for cocoa puffs!

2cents, the 96 hours is Evansville's private on the job training. He already had college and a minimum 580 hours of Academy training.
Part time officers go through the same testing as full time.
The psych testing, if not already, will soon be a WI requirement everywhere, so as to keep the good ol' boys from hiring their chiefs' brother-in-laws' hunting buddy for the police officer position in some small towns. WI has very high LE recruit standards, but some small towns might still have their own government. I don't know about Evansville....at least his true maturity level and attitude appeared early on...that's what probationary periods are for.

So he gets to be paid $5000.00 for making an ass of himself. I would let him just collect unemployment, because that is all he deserves.
He resigned, so why pay him a dime?
He made his bed so let him sleep in it!!!

I don't think they have any psych eval required.

Problem-atic of being a small town.

I am curious how the EVPD works. If you are working part time, do you have to go through the same psych evals and testing that the full time officers do? Does EVPD even have such testing procedures in place? Do you just get to move from part time to full time when there is an opening? Am I reading that he only had 96 hours of training in 13 months. That is not even 3 full weeks if my math is correct. I am not really sure that makes him worthy of becoming a full time officer and representing the Evansville community. Set me straight if need be, but obviously he wasn't fit to be an officer of the law, in my book!!

Seriously I think grooms and wife both need couseling of some sort. I will let you guess which one.

to be someone trained as a officer and lose control like that unreal.

lets not forget the drunk off our butt part.

Then he pleads ' not guilty' in Milton court.
Could luck to him with that. He should know better than anyone that won't fly.

Kudos to GaryPrimers comment!

Good grief. How are we as citizens supposed to trust policemen to "protect and serve" if they involve themselves with unbecoming behavior at any time? I, for one, would have a hard time respecting Mr. Grooms if he had to act as an officer in any situation. I think the council made a wise decision.

Grooms, you're a disgrace to the force, and that's worth a lifetime of character and good behavior- something your measley little $5000 could never buy you.
Good luck getting a new life. May I suggest a janitor at Screamin Meemees?

Good riddance! It is worth the money to be rid of a sleaze bag like this guy. Lucky to be rid of him before he causes some real trouble for the city.

with out just cause?

the guy has serious issues.