‘Wall’ Test for Police Applicants

* In response to LAPD’s ‘Wall’ May Topple as Part of Entrance Exam,” April 1:

As president of the Los Angeles Women Police Officers’ Assn., I am not in favor of removing “the wall” from the physical agility test. The ability to get over a wall is a job-related requirement. The reason for this requirement is because suspects routinely flee from the police, running through back yards and over walls to escape. Can you imagine? Two officers pursue a suspect. One officer goes over the wall or fence alone, and the other officer remains behind, looking for a stepladder. What’s next?

This requirement is a valid part of the screening process for all Los Angeles police officers. Any potential candidate capable of passing the other entrance requirements can learn to scale a six-foot wall. The department provides preparation for the entire testing process. These preparation courses have been open to all candidates for many years.

Climbing over the wall is not a matter of strength, but of agility and technique. Some woman may need to use a different method than men because of differences in upper body strength. The methods are all valid and are taught to candidates before the test is given. The department doesn’t need to reduce the hiring standards to allow more women to succeed. However, test preparation may require some individual initiative and planning.

LT. PAULETTE HERMAN

Los Angeles

* In 1977, I went “over the wall.” I was bruised like never before, and it took me about 30 tries, but the sense of accomplishment has never been duplicated. As a LAPD reserve officer specialist, this was not part of my required training. But I think it’s part of being a cop. Now the feminists want me to be a damn sissy.

SUSAN M. TELLEM

Los Angeles

* The average block wall between houses is six-feet tall, so if a criminal is being chased by a female officer he has a good chance of escaping just by jumping over a wall. We now have female firefighters who can’t push a ladder up to a burning building, so what’s next, blind detectives? What’s wrong with hiring the people most qualified for the job? It’s my life, not someone’s ego.

HAYDEN D. HAMILTON

Sherman Oaks

* I read with great interest former LAPD Assistant Chief David Dotson’s column (“Why Purging the LAPD of Bias Won’t Be Easy,” Opinion, April 3).

While I appreciate Dotson giving me credit for being the innovator of Neighborhood Watch while I was LAPD’s chief, I was shocked to read his revisionist history statements that I stopped hiring police officers when the city agreed to hire women as full-duty officers.

While chief, I abolished the rank of “policeman” and “policewoman” and replaced them with the generic rank of “police officer.” The accusation that I stopped hiring police officers because I did not want to hire female officers is absurd and insulting. As everyone knows, it is the City Council that authorizes the number of people the Police Department can hire, and it is the City Personnel Department that determines who is hired.

While the article is very moving, maybe Dotson ought to readopt the old LAPD motto, “Just the facts.”

ED DAVIS

Morro Bay