LASD Rejection Letter

[yzErnie]

Like what? Do you really want to put yourself in danger of inmate assault, danger of contracting a nasty disease from some geneius throwing feces in your face? Working in a cesspool..with the lowest of the low...Now you want to take that home to your family with you every single night?

Yeah I've been there and seen enough to last a lifetime. My comments are on the verge of bashing. NO WRONG, just telling the truth as I saw it. Good luck to you and your life of LASD and the CDC. If you have no other opportunity to earn a living, then I understand where you are coming from.

Are these comments really necessary? The kid obviously wants to pursue this career path and your comments are absolutely unnecessary.

[valleyguy]

I don't have a 4 year degree but i do have my certification from the Martial Arts Academy to become certified to teach, i didn't go to college as i was attending this academy (much like a trade school i guess) and i always intended to instruct in the arts, but i never thought that it would hurt me in the long run, I figured law enforcement agencies would need anyone certified in defensive tactics since how many of you actually know anyone who teaches defensive tactics, probably not a great choice, but its not like the skills Ive learned and taught over the years are useless, time to start applying at other agencies

Maybe this is the part that is making them nervous -- it might sound to them like a lot of talk about manhandling people. LEA's are very big on being politically correct and shedding the image of having to use force, so there's a big emphasis on other methods of compliance first. It's possible they don't see having martial arts as a big deal, since they are getting a lot of ex-military who have had extensive combat training already. Heck, half the kids I grew up with in the Valley did Karate or Tae Kwon Do. 6 years combined Kempo Karate and Tae Kwon Do (got up to Jr. Black belt and didn't feel like paying for a test in a money mill) myself.

So maybe they don't see hand-to-hand proficiency as a big plus as you might think.

In my LAPD interview, I really don't recall us discussing use of force at all other than maybe "Would you do it?"

[Ron-Solo]

I greatly appreciate everyone help and comments on the subject, I tried to contact my BI today but to no avail, I will try again on monday and hopefully fill out some more applications for other counties and local departments, and for the record to anyone, i wasn't going to file an appeal in an irrational, or angry manner i simply want to understand more of why I was disqualified so i can improve upon whatever the reason was and hopefully keep that from affecting me in the future

Sounds like you have a good attitude. Keep trying. Best of luck.

[Ron-Solo]

Anyone that tells you to just apply to another agency, with the tacit advice of not disclosing your dq on the LASD B/G is doing your a grave dis-service. Your fingerprints are most likely already on file and any other agency doing a background will know you applied elsewhere. Guess what will happen when they find out you failed to disclose your LASD dq? You'll never get hired anywhere. If you feel you were wrongly dq'd appeal. First, I would contact the B/G investigator. Your B/G Investigator may advise you what they found and whether or not it is advisable for you to apply again.

Sometimes there are aspects in an applicant's background where judgement is questionable and it is determined that we want to see another year of maturity and job stability, etc. When I was doing backgrounds, we always brought applicants in and went over what we found and told them what they needed to do to resolve the issues, character, stability, etc. If you were inappropriately DQ'd, you need to resolve it. A DQ on a background makes it more difficult to be hired elsewhere, not impossible, but more difficult.

Sound advice.

[Ron-Solo]

Yeah I've been there and seen enough to last a lifetime. My comments are on the verge of bashing. NO WRONG, just telling the truth as I saw it. Good luck to you and your life of LASD and the CDC. If you have no other opportunity to earn a living, then I understand where you are coming from.

Well, you went from being on the verge, to going over the line. By the way, the LASD and CDC are totally different.

Please take your 'sour grapes' and go somewhere else. Please read the rules of this forum before making any other posts.

[retired]

There is no need for anyone to respond to Steve G folks; I already addressed that in post #43:

Why on earth you would want to be a cop is beyond me. LASD working in the jails.....Really????? What a horrible start.....

Like what? Do you really want to put yourself in danger of inmate assault, danger of contracting a nasty disease from some geneius throwing feces in your face? Working in a cesspool..with the lowest of the low...Now you want to take that home to your family with you every single night?

Steve G, nothing in your comments contributes to the thread nor helps the OP. You have made your feelings known; if you can only contribute in a similar vein, do not post in this thread anymore.



Please do not feed the problem. Thanks.

[tigerhui]

Shaolin Crane,

You should definitely contact the BI and ask for clarification. If the BI explains what the judgment issue was, ask him if he has any suggestions on what you can do to resolve those issues.

I am not familiar with LASD's hiring practices, but in my experience, different departments look for different characteristics in their applicants. I've seen some PD's that tend to hire younger applicants, and others that want people with more life experience.

If you are dead set on LASD, ask the BI if there is a set amount of time you need to wait before reapplying. You may also want to check if LASD would consider you for a reserve position. Granted, a paycheck is always preferred, but in this economy, it might pay off to get your foot in the door.

[yzErnie]

Disclaimer:
From what you have posted you sound like you have yourself together. No offense to you and please remember, we are basing what we say and the advise we are giving you on your side of the story. There is the other side of this that we are not privy to.

My wife worked our backgrounds for a couple of years. She told me when an applicant was "disqualified" they were not allowed to tell the applicant a specific reason why the "disqualification" happened. For our department, the lack of disclosure may be a department protocol and not a POST mandate. She was however, surprised they would tell you why you got the DQ.

She also said the "judgement" concern is something that stems from POST mandated requirements for an applicant. There is also a HUGE range of issues that could cause a "judgement" disqualification. Without knowing exactly what caused them to use this as a reason it would be foolish to guess. Her suggestion is to recontact your background investigator and see if you can get specifics. The BI may or may not tell you.

[cmonk518]

[I]Disclaimer:

My wife worked our backgrounds for a couple of years. She told me when an applicant was "disqualified" they were not allowed to tell the applicant a specific reason why the "disqualification" happened. For our department, the lack of disclosure may be a department protocol and not a POST mandate. She was however, surprised they would tell you why you got the DQ.

She also said the "judgement" concern is something that stems from POST mandated requirements for an applicant. There is also a HUGE range of issues that could cause a "judgement" disqualification. Without knowing exactly what caused them to use this as a reason it would be foolish to guess. Her suggestion is to recontact your background investigator and see if you can get specifics. The BI may or may not tell you.

Yup, you are more than 100% correct. They will more than likely NOT tell you the reason. Because if you were to specifically find out what the reason why you were rejected, some people might just tend to lie, skip, and/or withhold that information on future LE applications....esp. if they could pinpoint what it was that hurt their chances.

[banzaijohn]

If you have an otherwise qualified applicant who failed to meet a POST standard and you DQ them, you more or less diminish his or ability to get hired elsewhere. It is more appropriate to bring the applicant in, advise them where they failed to meet standards, in a broad sense of course, no specifics. If the candidate is salvageable let them remove their name from the eligibility list. That way they don't have the stigma of a DQ hanging over them. Qualified candidates are too valuable to merely DQ and discard if they're salvageable for lapses in judgement or maturity that could be rectified over the course of prolonged employment or responsibility.

Weeding out the inappropriate candidates is the easy part. Salvaging the good ones is the hard part.

[Shaolin Crane]

I'm aware that judgment could be a large viarity of things, most people who I have discussed the subject with who have been through the process/are a part of the process/or know someone who handles the part of this process say it could simply be that due to my age they feel I would have a hard time making a rational judgment when time comes, not sure how true that is but it seems plausible I guess, not sure how someone the same age as myself with a degree would be any less susceptible to that, but im going to call my BI monday and see if he can't shed some light on it

[mlatino]

I'm aware that judgment could be a large viarity of things, most people who I have discussed the subject with who have been through the process/are a part of the process/or know someone who handles the part of this process say it could simply be that due to my age they feel I would have a hard time making a rational judgment when time comes, not sure how true that is but it seems plausible I guess, not sure how someone the same age as myself with a degree would be any less susceptible to that, but im going to call my BI monday and see if he can't shed some light on it

LONGEST. SENTENCE. EVER.

[michelim21]

Are there even any police depts. that you know of that don't require polygraph testing?

I would believe almost every single federal and local government agency that requires carrying loaded firearms as part of your daily job would require a polygraph test. It can't be that surprising to you.

Not sure if this was touched upon, but I know Border Patrol chooses at random which applicants to polygraph. They do not polygraph all of them. But at the local level, I believe they either polygraph or voice stress analysis.

[bfoster]

I was hired at 22 with no prior law enforcement experience. I was working in a bank prior to changing careers. It can happen. You just gotta shop around for a department that doesn't mind hiring young folks. I pretty much knew getting in that the department that was hiring me probably wasn't going to be my home until retirement. But I gave them two solid years, and moved on to a place that suited my needs and personality better. It is a lot easier to get into those desirable departments after you've been hired and had time on. Put apps in til you get a badge, and department shop once you're more marketable.

[Compuham]

Contact your background investigator and see if he/she will give you more information. Lack of judgment seems to be a catchall to me. It is possible that at 21 years of age, they have sufficient candidates who have a few years on you and therefor have military or more education, so they are picking and choosing who they think are the best.
Do not be discouraged though; try with other agencies. Good luck...