> Philip Stinson, a professor who researches police crime at Bowling Green State University, told Newsweek that Laudon's pattern is common across the United States. Small, municipal departments are particularly incentivized to overlook blemishes in an officer's record if it means they can fill a job faster and more cheaply.

> "A lot of those agencies like to hire people who have already got their Police Academy training, or in some states that would include a state-level certification," said Stinson. "If they have that, it's less of a problem for them. They don't have to pay them to go to the Academy and lose that time and cost involved."

If only they could use any of that government bloat money that law enforcement gets for, you know, stuff like a background check...

> Some departments don't have thorough background checks, while others simply choose to overlook past misconduct. Even if officers lose their certification, their new employers may never find out.

Oh, they don't spend the money because they don't care.

> "There's a decertification registry, but it's voluntary," said Stinson. "A lot of prospective law enforcement agency employers don't check with them, and a lot of states don't provide information to that registry."

> In cases like Laudon's, where an officer resigns during a misconduct review, the investigation might just remain under lock and key.

> Stinson said, "Sometimes what will happen is they won't even finish writing up an internal discipline investigation report because the officer is no longer employed there—they don't have jurisdiction over them administratively. So sometimes there's no paper trail at all."

Oh and it's also easy to wiggle out of if you leave mid-investigation, get to your house, and shout "BASE!" apparently.

#BUT GOSH, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE SAY "ACAB"