Right,that is how an Undercover Officer works.. Not being recognizable.
So when undercover, no one would recognize them as they see them when they are undercover. Due to the fact that he was on his way to work, they would not recognize him as an undercover officer obviously. Just saying, that is what has being said to me about him being undercover.
So, being in a marked car, in his police uniform, with a bullet proof vest on is 'undercover'???
So, being in a marked car, in his police uniform, with a bullet proof vest on is 'undercover'???
I have not read anything in MSM that he was undercover. In fact, there is a quote in this article that says, "everyday he put on his uniform." Undercover a do not wear uniforms. That was my point and Katy's.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...er-slain-charles-gliniewicz-article-1.2351439
He was on his way to work.So, being in a marked car, in his police uniform, with a bullet proof vest on is 'undercover'???
I have not read anything in MSM that he was undercover. In fact, there is a quote in this article that says, "everyday he put on his uniform." Undercover a do not wear uniforms. That was my point and Katy's.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...er-slain-charles-gliniewicz-article-1.2351439
So, being in a marked car, in his police uniform, with a bullet proof vest on is 'undercover'???
Like I said in my post pertaining to the talk in the town, that is what some people are saying. Do not shoot the messenger. When I told them about some of the speculation here, they thought that some here are out of their mind in some of the posts here.Exactly. Those who are in "deep dark undercover" or even undercover, are not in uniform. They are in plain clothes and do not drive a marked car. The drive an unmarked car.p, unless his was unmarked and he was out of uniform.
Maybe in deep dark undercover going in the other direction.
Thank you for this question, people brought up the internal investigation and also the drug/gang investigation as the reason for being undercover.Ok, so to clarify, you all are referring to him as being 'undercover' to his co-workers. Not undercover to the public at large. You all are referring to him being ' Internal Affairs' and pretending not to be?
OK I don't get it LOL what do you mean? JMO
I meant maybe he was undercover in the department. I don't think that's the case, just trying to work out IF he were 'undercover' how would that match up with him wearing a uniform and driving a patrol car?
Thank you for this question, people brought up the internal investigation and also the drug/gang investigation as the reason for being undercover.
They also brought up the fact that the new Chief was head of the Gang Task Force.
If he was undercover as an Internal Affairs source and he was testifying against fellow officers then that would be dangerous. But there are only 5 officers in the precinct, IIRC. One was on unpaid leave, one retired, one replaced the Chief, so that just leaves one more officer as potential suspect. But that would have included the back up officers....so?
If he was undercover as an Internal Affairs source and he was testifying against fellow officers then that would be dangerous. But there are only 5 officers in the precinct, IIRC. One was on unpaid leave, one retired, one replaced the Chief, so that just leaves one more officer as potential suspect. But that would have included the back up officers....so?