zdd

[emvampyre]

I think police departments will "look the other way," if you will, when the admitted crime is not serious (ie, wobblett) or the statute of limitations has expired. Other than that, I say the department has a duty to investigate crimes. They are still police, after all.

Um, yeah they are still the police...If you broke the law in the past, why would a department choose you over another, well qualified candidate with no criminal history? By hiring an individual with a criminal history, juvenile or otherwise, that department is taking on a possible known liability. Just admiting that one has done the crime, doesn't mean one should be forgiven for it by an agency looking to hire a law enforcement officer.

To the OP: In this day and age of LEO jobs becoming as rare as hen's teeth, your buddy has about a 1 in a gajllion chance of being hired by any California department. The admitted drug use, especially the meth, is going to be a no go. Theft of firearms? That would be a death blow immediately and would probably start an investigation. Regardless if the thefts occured when one was a juvie...

Disclaimer:when I said "you" in my post I was NOT pointing out or saying anything about any of the above posters. It was just a figure of speech. Yes, I'm a LEO with 24 years experience. Also, gajillion is a number in my world. I believe it is the defecit goal of the Dems here in California...

[Roddd]

The meth use may not be a disqualifier...I've seen people hired with admitted meth and cocaine use, but it's been 10 years and they've had a clean track record since. Although it's rare, it still is possible to be hired. But the theft and sale of firearms, that's setting the department up for a pattern of misconduct...and a possible criminal case. Tell your buddy he seems more apt to be in the BACK of a police car...

[Jonathan Doe]

Murders and stolen guns do not have a statute of limitation as far as I know. It could be on going investigation, maybe just a cold case now.

[capo]

A guy like that doesn't need a badge.

[SkyStorm82]

I don't care if a certain dept is cool with a former tweaker. I won't work with someone like that.
Capo is right. Society doesn't need someone like that with a badge.

[JayCo]

Here is a case right here. This guy was arrested for admitting to sexual molestation.

https://www.10news.com/news/27919115/detail.html

Question No. 175, which asked applicants if they have ever viewed, purchased, sold or subscribed to child pornography, also received a yes response.

I took my Poly while I was working in the sexual assault unit at the DA's office. Had to answer yes to this question because I used to see this in evidence all the time. I could tell the LT. who gave me the poly was trying to hold back his reaction....thank god he let me explain right away.

[Tacit Blue]

The meth use may not be a disqualifier...I've seen people hired with admitted meth and cocaine use, but it's been 10 years and they've had a clean track record since. Although it's rare, it still is possible to be hired. But the theft and sale of firearms, that's setting the department up for a pattern of misconduct...and a possible criminal case. Tell your buddy he seems more apt to be in the BACK of a police car...

Stealing firearms is like stealing someones Women, you just don't do that.....

[BigDogatPlay]

The meth use may not be a disqualifier...I've seen people hired with admitted meth and cocaine use, but it's been 10 years and they've had a clean track record since.

And in the current employment environment with tons of laid off officers already in the pipeline and entry level candidate who admits to meth use and felonious activity in their background is going to get DQ very quickly. And depending on when in time those felonies took place, he could indeed be subject to arrest and prosecution if the cards lined up right against him.

I echo the earlier advice to the OP.... counsel your friend to consider a different career.

ETA:

I took my Poly while I was working in the sexual assault unit at the DA's office. Had to answer yes to this question because I used to see this in evidence all the time. I could tell the LT. who gave me the poly was trying to hold back his reaction....thank god he let me explain right away.

I had similar looks late in my career, because I had worked crimes against children earlier in my career. But once the explanation was on the table, it was no longer of consequence.

[762.DEFENSE]

For someone that has their Masters degree, your friend isn't too bright.

Seriously!

[Notorious]

Stealing firearms is like stealing someones Women, you just don't do that.....

Hey now, let's not get crazy!

I can always find another woman... but in CA, replacing some of my guns would be impossible.

[Notorious]

I had similar looks late in my career, because I had worked crimes against children earlier in my career. But once the explanation was on the table, it was no longer of consequence.

The protocol for lateral polygraphs always contain the disclaimer, "Other than in the line of duty" so that the various questions can be explained if you had to say yes but it was for work.

I had to answer a few that way and never had a problem.

[Tacit Blue]

Also don't listen to idiots telling you to put a tack in your shoe. Its a joke, I would laugh my *** off if i was the examiner and your sock started turning red. Instant DQ!

[tyrist]

It doesn't sound like this is a proper career choice for your friend.

First trying to find out if he should lie or not is a big NO NO

Second he has committed multiple felonies whether detected or not.

He is not the type of person who should be placed in a position of extreme trust. Hopefully he can find something else rewarding and productive to do.

[Notorious]

Another question on the witch hunt divining rod reading tea leaves method of backgrounds (aka polygraphs), there is always a question about if you have committed an act which would have been a crime if caught.. or something along those lines.

[bill_k_lopez]

http://law.findlaw.com/state-laws/cr...ns/california/

In the poly, they will ask if he ever stole anything. His answer is, when I was a minor.
I myself would never mention that I stole guns and sold them. But then, I never stole guns and sold them.
If this were me, I would consult an attorney before I subject myself to anything like that.

If the poly for LE is like the poly for DOD, they have lattitude to ask related/follow up questions.

Are they going to specifically ask you "Have you ever stolen a firearm?" No, unless something leads them down that path.

I'm thinking that your buddy has way too much going on from just a few years ago that this is not going to go well for him.

Is he going to get arrested for what he did? Highly doubt it. Admiting to a crime under a poly (as the only evidence) isn't going to get a DA very far.