Maywood police and 2nd chances

Re “Maywood employs police officers with a history of trouble,” April 1

Acting Maywood Police Chief Richard Lyons said: “It’s OK to give a person a second chance if you learn from your mistake.” Does Lyons think he is running an elementary school, where students get warnings before recess privileges are revoked? There is nothing wrong with second, even third, chances, but the Maywood Police Department is an inappropriate place for second chances. Men and women who are allowed to carry leather-encased, lead-filled hand weapons should not be given second chances.

Second chances should not jeopardize the security of an entire city. We must demand more for our fellow California communities. The solution is regulation by transparency and, as Lyons suggested, independent consultants. The Maywood Police Department should lose the privilege of non-transparency of police discipline records -- and probably should never have had it in the first place.

VALERIE SULLIVAN

Laguna Hills

*

Re “Mayberry, not Maywood,” editorial, April 3

The vast majority of officers working in Maywood are not the monsters you are trying to make us out to be. The public would never know that we have any good officers based on the negative press we are receiving. Do we have issues? You bet, just like every other police department that employees human beings. Many issues are now being addressed by the department, specifically by our acting chief, through several outside independent investigations.

Your editorial does a gross injustice to the majority of good officers here by painting them all with the same broad brush. The Times has always been at the forefront of decrying profiling and stereotyping, yet your reporting and editorializing on the Maywood Police Department does just that.

SGT. SCOTT ANDERSON

President, Maywood Police

Mid-Management Assn.